Court of Appeals of Maryland· 5/21/1954
Nixon v. State
Citations
- 105 A.2d 243
- 204 Md. 475
- 1954 Md. LEXIS 228
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that it is necessary or desirable that the evidence remains in the same condition as originally found and that a challenge to the validity of a piece of evidence is a question of reasonable probability not certainty
- holding that it is necessary or desirable that the evidence remains in the same condition as 6 originally found and that a challenge to the validity of a piece of evidence is a question of reasonable probability not certainty
- reviewing trial court’s ruling excluding evidence based on inadequate chain of custody for an abuse of discretion
- evidence concerning the “quarrelsome disposition” of the victim is properly excluded unless a proper foundation is laid
- evidence concerning the \quarrelsome disposition\ of the victim is properly excluded unless a proper foundation is laid
- evidence concerning the “quarrelsome disposition” of the victim is properly excluded unless a proper foundation is laid
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Delaplaine, Collins, Henderson, Hammond
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Reed v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1978-09-06· cited 224×
- Thomas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-10-31· cited 113×
- Breeding v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1959-06-08· cited 99×
- Best v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1989-04-27· cited 45×
- State v. BrownNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1968-01-25· cited 32×
- Crawford v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1963-05-01· cited 28×
- Cooper v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2013-08-26· cited 26×
- Moore v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1987-11-10· cited 22×
- State v. ChristmasSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1968-10-29· cited 20×
- Finnegan v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1976-10-07· cited 13×
- Clough v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware· 1972-07-26· cited 12×
- Amos v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1979-04-20· cited 11×
- Hemingway v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1988-07-12· cited 11×
- Hallengren v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1972-01-19· cited 10×
- Blake v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1972-07-06· cited 10×
- Colesanti v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1984-10-05· cited 8×
- Easter v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2015-05-27· cited 7×
- State v. KoenigSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1983-04-27· cited 5×
- State v. AnderbergSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1975-08-22· cited 4×
- Wheeler v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2017-07-03· cited 2×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Chisley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1953-03-20· cited 147×
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1954-02-11· cited 69×
- Grammer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-10-18· cited 68×
- United States v. S. B. Penick & Co.Second Circuit· 1943-06-17· cited 59×
- Pasadena Research Laboratories, Inc. v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1948-07-16· cited 57×
- Edwards v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1975-10-01· cited 45×
- Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1885-12-10· cited 37×
- Addington v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1897-02-01· cited 33×
- Allison v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1953-07-02· cited 28×
- Ross v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1939-04-14· cited 14×
- Hanye v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1896-06-18· cited 10×
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.