Court of Appeals of Maryland· 11/27/1984
Ferguson v. State
Citations
- 483 A.2d 1255
- 301 Md. 542
- 1984 Md. LEXIS 388
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- discussing Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963)
- “[A]n intervening circumstance is an event that breaks the causal connection between the unlawful conduct and the derivative evidence.”
- “[T]he exclusionary rule ... [is] a judicially imposed sanction for violations of the [FJourth [AJmendment against unreasonable searches and seizures in state prosecutions”
- “[TJhe Comi extended the exclusionary rule to evidence that was the indirect product or ‘fruit’ of police misconduct in violation of the fourth amend- -merit.” (Emphasis supplied)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Cole
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- McMillian v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1992-01-24· cited 129×
- Miles v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-09-18· cited 70×
- Scott v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-10-11· cited 69×
- Cox v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2011-09-20· cited 52×
- Myers v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2006-10-24· cited 45×
- Commonwealth v. CroweMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1986-01-22· cited 36×
- Pringle v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2002-08-27· cited 34×
- Wallace v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2003-02-13· cited 30×
- Sizer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2017-11-28· cited 26×
- Conboy v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2004-03-02· cited 24×
- Ashford v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2002-09-12· cited 23×
- Cox v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2007-02-08· cited 21×
- State v. LeCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-11-13· cited 15×
- State v. Tan LeCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-11-13· cited 15×
- In re Darryl P.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2013-03-25· cited 12×
- Brown v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1998-12-04· cited 10×
- McMillian v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1991-01-16· cited 8×
- Partee v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1998-05-01· cited 7×
- State v. HoltCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2012-08-29· cited 7×
- Volkomer v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2006-04-27· cited 6×
Cites
26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1963-01-14· cited 12,871×
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court· 1961-10-09· cited 9,088×
- Brown v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1975-06-26· cited 4,589×
- Dunaway v. New YorkSupreme Court· 1979-06-05· cited 3,633×
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1984-06-11· cited 3,080×
- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1920-03-01· cited 2,373×
- Nardone v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1939-12-11· cited 1,927×
- Segura v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1984-07-05· cited 1,569×
- Davis v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1969-04-23· cited 1,385×
- United States v. CrewsSupreme Court· 1980-03-25· cited 1,151×
- Johnson v. LouisianaSupreme Court· 1972-05-22· cited 1,080×
- Harrison v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 805×
- Taylor v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1982-06-23· cited 633×
- People v. PayneIllinois Supreme Court· 1983-10-21· cited 128×
- Everhart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1975-04-14· cited 90×
- People v. TeresinskiCalifornia Supreme Court· 1982-02-18· cited 78×
- Mefford and Blackburn v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1964-07-07· cited 74×
- United States v. EdmonsSecond Circuit· 1970-10-05· cited 69×
- Garrett v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1984-02-21· cited 47×
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.