Wills v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
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
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Holland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Dorsey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- Danial Siebert v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Merzbacher v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- Darcars Motors of Silver Spring, Inc. v. BorzymCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- Hunt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- Miller v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- Coleman v. Anne Arundel County Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.