Add to ORKGThe Court of Appeals of Maryland held that Maryland Rule 4-707(b) does not entitle an indigent petitioner to counsel for purposes of a post conviction petition for DNA testing. Fuster v. State, 437 Md. 653, 657-58, 89 A.3d 1114, 1116 (2014). In addition, the court held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by failing to consider whether to appoint the petitioner counsel under under section 8-201 of the Maryland Criminal Procedure Code. Id. The court further held that the circuit court used the correct legal standard in ruling on the petition. Id. Finally, the court held that the petitioner failed to preserve for appellate review whether the circuit court clearly erred in concluding that the State conducted a reasonable search ...
In this case the appellants sought to overturn a decision by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City th...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that convicted defendants must allege that they did not actual...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that advisory only jury instructions are not harmless error an...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that Maryland Rule 4-707(b) does not entitle an indigent petit...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the trial court erred in denying a hearing on a petition ...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the doctrine of res judicata and Maryland Rule 4-704 do n...
Recently, the Maryland Court of Appeals became the first state court of last resort to reject Gideon...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that defense counsel’s statements conveyed an objection to the...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a vic...
Amici curiae brief filed by 78 faculty members from the University of Maryland School of Law and the...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a motion to correct an illegal sentence can only be grant...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a defendant waives review of any issue as to allegedly in...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a “benefit,” as used in Maryland Criminal Pattern Jury In...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a note from a jury, containing allegations that a juror w...
The petitioner requested the Maryland Court of Appeals to reverse a decision that his criminal plea ...
In this case the appellants sought to overturn a decision by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City th...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that convicted defendants must allege that they did not actual...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that advisory only jury instructions are not harmless error an...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that Maryland Rule 4-707(b) does not entitle an indigent petit...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the trial court erred in denying a hearing on a petition ...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the doctrine of res judicata and Maryland Rule 4-704 do n...
Recently, the Maryland Court of Appeals became the first state court of last resort to reject Gideon...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that defense counsel’s statements conveyed an objection to the...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a vic...
Amici curiae brief filed by 78 faculty members from the University of Maryland School of Law and the...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a motion to correct an illegal sentence can only be grant...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a defendant waives review of any issue as to allegedly in...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a “benefit,” as used in Maryland Criminal Pattern Jury In...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a note from a jury, containing allegations that a juror w...
The petitioner requested the Maryland Court of Appeals to reverse a decision that his criminal plea ...
In this case the appellants sought to overturn a decision by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City th...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that convicted defendants must allege that they did not actual...
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that advisory only jury instructions are not harmless error an...