See Code (1957, 1997 Repl.Vol.), Art. 33, § 3-6. In this connection, see Blount v. Board of Elections, 247 Md. 342, 344, 230 A.2d 639, 641 (1967). Senator Blount's state income tax returns, including the most recent, list his address as 3410 Copley Road, Baltimore City. Baltimore City has continuously been listed on the returns as the subdivision in which Senator Blount resides, and, therefore, the local portion of the income tax goes to Baltimore City. The income tax returns all reflect that they were filed under penalties of perjury.
1976) (state representative); Draper v. Phelps, 351 F. Supp. 677, 686 (W.D.Okla. 1972) (state representative); Blount v. Board of Supervisors of Elections, 247 Md. 342, 350, 230 A.2d 639, 643 (1967) (state constitutional convention delegate); Hendrix v. State ex rel. Oklahoma State Election Board, 554 P.2d 770, 772 (Okla. 1976) (state representative). There are primarily three reasons why courts have upheld state constitutional and statutory durational residency requirements for state offices.
That is far shorter than the seven-year state residency requirement for state senators upheld by the United States Supreme Court in Sununu, supra, 420 U.S. 958. Numerous courts have since upheld such short requirements. See e.g., Akron, supra, 660 F.2d at 167-69 (upholding one-year ward residency requirement); Brewster, supra, 541 S.W.2d at 307, 310; Cox v. Barber, 568 S.E.2d 478, 481-82 & n.14 (Ga. 2002) (upholding one-year district residency requirement, despite Robertson); Blount v. Board of Supervisors, 230 A.2d 639 (Md. Ct. App. 1967) (upholding one-year district residency requirement). The original drafters of this requirement in the New Jersey Constitution obviously felt that one year was the minimum period for the candidates for either house to get to know the voters of the district, and for the voters of the district to get to know the candidate.
Numerous courts have since upheld such short requirements. See e.g., Akron, supra, 660 F.2d at 167–69 (upholding one-year ward residency requirement); Brewster, supra, 541 S.W.2d at 307, 310;Cox v. Barber, 275 Ga. 415, 568 S.E.2d 478, 481–82 & n. 14 (2002) (upholding one-year district residency requirement, despite Robertson); Blount v. Board of Supervisors, 247 Md. 342, 230 A.2d 639 (1967) (upholding one-year district residency requirement). The original drafters of this requirement in the New Jersey Constitution obviously felt that one year was the minimum period for the candidates for either house to get to know the voters of the district, and for the voters of the district to get to know the candidate.