Holmes v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “prior consistent statements] may not be admitted to counter all forms of impeachment or to bolster the witness merely because [he or] she has been discredited”
• acknowledging that a criminal defendant’s motive to fabricate exists from the time of the crime
• stating that the relevant state rule “embodies the common-law, pre-motive rule” and giving the state rule “the same interpretation the Supreme Court gave the federal rule in Tome ”
• adopting Tome but allowing prior consistent statements under unique Maryland rule with no federal counterpart
• adopting Tome but allowing prior consistent statements under unique Maryland rule with no federal counterpart
• noting that “[p]rior consistent statements used for rehabilitation of a witness whose credibility is attacked are relevant not for their truth ... [but rather] [t]hey are relevant because the circumstances under which they are made rebut an attack on the witness’s credibility”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

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

• People v. Eppens
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1999-04-26· cited 556×
• Attorney Grievance Commission v. Fezell
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2000-10-13· cited 77×
• Noel v. Commonwealth
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2002-06-13· cited 73×
• State v. Brown
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1998-09-16· cited 60×
• Rawlings v. Rawlings
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-02-05· cited 40×
• State v. Jones
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2001-04-26· cited 38×
• Dike v. State
  Wyoming Supreme Court· 1999-11-30· cited 35×
• Brooks v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2014-08-27· cited 35×
• Attorney Grievance Commission v. Sapero
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2007-08-01· cited 29×
• Zetty v. Piatt
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-07-16· cited 23×
• McCray v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1998-08-26· cited 20×
• Blair v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2000-03-06· cited 19×
• Thomas v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2012-10-22· cited 19×
• Warehime v. Dell
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1998-12-01· cited 16×
• Fontaine v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2000-09-28· cited 15×
• Hajireen v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2012-03-02· cited 14×
• Quansah v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2012-09-26· cited 14×
• Jensen v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1999-08-31· cited 13×
• Logan v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2005-09-07· cited 12×
• State v. Bujan
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2006-08-03· cited 9×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Tome v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1995-01-10· cited 570×
• Danial Siebert v. Alabama
  Supreme Court· 1990-06-28· cited 310×
• David ENGEBRETSEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, Hartford Insurance Company, Intervening Plaintiff, v. FAIRCHILD AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
  Sixth Circuit· 1994-06-09· cited 95×
• Collins v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1990-01-10· cited 87×
• In re Victor B.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1994-08-29· cited 80×
• Richwind Joint Venture 4 v. Brunson
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1994-08-22· cited 78×
• Bruce v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1990-02-27· cited 77×
• United States v. Michel Pierre
  Second Circuit· 1986-01-17· cited 70×
• United States v. Manuel Castillo and Juan Fernandez
  Second Circuit· 1994-01-28· cited 49×
• State v. Harrell
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1997-11-18· cited 43×
• Johnson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1975-02-24· cited 41×
• Long v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1996-11-07· cited 32×
• Holmes v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1997-08-28· cited 6×