Wright v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “We are confident that the jury would consider the entire jury charge and employ its common sense to reach the conclusion that it should consider the relevance of [Petitioner’s destruction or concealment of evidence] only if it first identified him as the person who [cut his hair].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rainey v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2022-08-11· cited 10×
• Joiner v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2025-05-30
• Johnson v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2026-04-02
• Thomas v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2026-05-01

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Elliott
  California Supreme Court· 2012-02-02· cited 298×
• Thompson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2006-06-20· cited 52×
• Chambers v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1994-12-19· cited 47×
• Commonwealth v. Bastaldo
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2015-06-25· cited 31×
• People v. Rhodes
  California Court of Appeal· 1989-05-02· cited 23×
• Commonwealth v. Groce
  Massachusetts Appeals Court· 1988-01-26· cited 15×
• Hall v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2014-03-25· cited 13×
• Germany v. State
  Wyoming Supreme Court· 2000-03-16· cited 9×
• Wright v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2020-07-31· cited 1×