Tucker v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• declaring that “[i]t is well-established that the State is not confined in its proof to the date alleged in the charging document”
• declaring that \[i]t is well-established that the State is not confined in its proof to the date alleged in the charging document\
• declaring that “[i]t is well-established that the State is not confined in its proof to the date alleged in the charging document”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Mulkey
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1989-07-06· cited 40×
• Mills v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1971-06-30· cited 35×
• Washington v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1982-05-27· cited 30×
• Wilkins v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1973-01-11· cited 30×
• Manuel v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1990-11-14· cited 24×
• Thompson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2010-02-17· cited 10×
• Thompson v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2008-09-03· cited 7×
• Johnson v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1974-05-20· cited 6×
• Carter v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1977-03-10· cited 4×
• Claybourne v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2013-02-28· cited 2×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Corbin v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1965-02-10· cited 78×
• Carroll v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1968-01-31· cited 27×
• Davis v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1967-08-03· cited 13×
• West v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1968-02-14· cited 7×