McDaniel v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “A victim must still present competent evidence that the expenses are reasonably certain to be incurred”
• “Competent evidence of entitlement to, and the amount of, restitution need only be reliable, admissible, and established by a preponderance of the evidence.”
• “Our interpretation [that the term ‘losses’ covers expenses not yet incurred by the time of the hearing] does not mean that mere speculative claims will satisfy the statutory requirements for recovery.”
• “[A] victim is presumed to have a right to restitution under subsection (a

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Cody H.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2017-03-24· cited 11×
• In re: G.R.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2019-04-01

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Chaney v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2007-03-14· cited 110×
• Goff v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2005-06-06· cited 40×
• Downes v. Downes
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2005-08-15· cited 38×
• Brecker v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1985-09-13· cited 36×
• Grey v. Allstate Insurance
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-04-09· cited 28×
• Anne Arundel County v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1993-03-24· cited 17×
• Carter v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2010-06-03· cited 14×
• In Re John M.
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1999-12-01· cited 12×
• Reiger v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2006-09-22· cited 11×
• State v. Sullivan
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2009-03-09· cited 6×
• Williams v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2011-07-11· cited 6×
• Juliano v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2006-01-27· cited 3×