Legal Opinion

Wills v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 5, 1993No. 93, September Term, 1992PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHARLES E. ORTH, Jr. Judge,

Specially Assigned.

I

The administration of justice in Maryland recognizes three standards of proof to test the sufficiency of the *374evidence. The lowest standard requires proof by a “preponderance” of the evidence; the highest standard demands proof “beyond a reasonable doubt;” an intermediate standard calls for proof that is “clear and convincing.”1

We expect the trier of the facts to distinguish the subtle distinctions and nuances of a standard when called upon to apply it. But the terms “preponderance,” “clear and convincing” and “reasonable doubt” are not, at least…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Holland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  4. Dorsey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  5. Danial Siebert v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Merzbacher v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  2. Darcars Motors of Silver Spring, Inc. v. BorzymCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  3. Hunt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  4. Miller v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  5. Coleman v. Anne Arundel County Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002

44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API