Sign In
Free Newsletter
GARY BAYNOR v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Did the court err by denying Baynor’s petition for writ of actual innocence without a hearing?
KEVIN TERRELL GRAY v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Did the trial court abuse its discretion by allowing the State to make an improper closing argument, which cited to a stipulation by the defense?
WILLIAM BREHON v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Appellant argues that he was seized at the moment he was first confronted by Officer Burns and that he remained under an alleged Terry detention for between 20 and 30 minutes without any reasonable suspicion that he was then engaging or had engaged in any unlawful activity.
TONY STEPHENSON v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Appellant presents two questions: 1. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous or deadly weapon? 2. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the conviction for robbery?
STATE OF MARYLAND v. CHUCKIE DONALDSON
The State argues that appellee, who was on parole at the time of the search, had a diminished expectation of privacy. Appellee asserts that, because the officer was unaware that appellee was on parole, appellee’s status did not justify the warrantless search.
MICHAEL DAVON CHRISTIAN v. STEWART LEVITAS
Appellant maintains that the court erred in excluding Dr. Klein’s testimony regarding the causal nexus between the injuries sustained and the Property being the source of the lead paint exposure. Appellee responds that Dr. Klein lacked the sufficient factual basis to opine as to either.
TYJUAN BROWN v. ESTATE OF JAMES HARVEY FOIT, et al.
This lead paint case involves two potential sources of lead exposure to appellant, one of which was never tested for lead and has since been destroyed. The question is whether enough circumstantial evidence was presented regarding negligence at the untested property to raise a jury question and survive summary judgment.
ANTONIO CHARLES JOHNSON v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Convicted of first-degree assault, appellant presents one issue: Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting and playing for the jury recordings of police interviews that included inadmissible and highly prejudicial material.
ADENE BEKELE v. STATE of MARYLAND
Convicted of kidnapping and related crimes, Bekele asks this Court to review rulings that constrained the scope of the defense cross-examination of a prosecution witness.
MELVIN THOMAS v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Though appellant presented seven bases for a new trial, on appeal, he focuses on only one : that his right to a fair trial was compromised because he was unable to present impeachment evidence regarding the victim’s drug dealing referenced in pre-trial statements
RODNEY TRAVIS v. JEFFREY B. FISHER, et al., SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES
Appellant defaulted on his loan, failed to satisfy his debt, and failed to present any evidence to call into question the validity of the foreclosure sale. Nor was he entitled to a jury trial at his hearing on a foreclosure proceeding in 2012.
SEAN JENKINS v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Convicted of attempted murder and related crimes, appellant asks: 1. Did the circuit court err in denying appellant's Motion to Suppress when he presented evidence he was intoxicated at the time he made his statements to police? 2. Did the circuit court err in limiting appellant's closing argument?
