Howard v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• The district court in a criminal case possessed “fundamental jurisdiction” to decide whether the adoption of an agency regulation violated the Maryland Constitution.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-07-13· cited 59×
• Vargas-Aguila v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2011-12-02· cited 4×
• White v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1991-12-06· cited 2×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Pulley v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1980-04-10· cited 99×
• State v. Bailey
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1980-11-24· cited 55×
• Kawamura v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-04-09· cited 47×
• Warren v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1977-10-06· cited 39×
• Vonoppenfeld v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1983-01-07· cited 6×
• Smith v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1987-11-13· cited 3×