Skip to main content

Cook v. State

Citations

  • 381 A.2d 671
  • 281 Md. 665
  • 1978 Md. LEXIS 343

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “[I]t is widely agreed that exclusionary orders resemble mere evidentiary rulings, interlocutory in nature and hence are intrinsically non-final.” Id. at 670, 381 A.2d 671
  • “It is beyond question that the closely related doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel apply to criminal as well as civil causes.”
  • differentiating collateral estoppel from the related doctrine of res judicata
  • “Appellant alleges no double jeopardy violation in the present case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Smith, Digges, Levine, Eldridge, Orth

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

53 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.