The Court of Special Appeals appears to have spent their Labor-Day weekend hard at work drafting opinions.

CORY JAMAUL JONES v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Sharer, Filed Sept. 4, 2013,
http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2013/2224s11.pdf
GSR Test- Search warrant not necessary to obtain GSR sample so long as probable cause exists

KHALIQ KHAN v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Mattricciani, Filed Sept. 4, 2013,
http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2013/2715s11.pdf
Batson- Court re-seated juror after finding defense attorney’s excuse for striking to white jurors

Other notes:
– Jury Selection- If a party’s use of peremptory strikes is contested as unconstitutionally discriminatory: 1) The trial court is to determine whether a prima facie case of racial discrimination against potential jurors exists; 2) If so, the party exercising the peremptory strikes must present a race-neutral explanation for each strike; 3) The trial court must then decide whether purposeful discrimination has occurred.
– Jury Selection- That the party’s explanation is race- and gender-neutral and an accurate description of the juror is not alone sufficient to withstand a Batson challenge; the court must decide whether the reasons given are pretextual
– Jury Selection (footnote) – “It is fair to disallow a strike where racial bias plays any part in the decision to strike a juror.”
– Jury Selection- Appellate review of a Batson challenge is a “clearly erroneous” standard
– Open Door- If one party has introduced irrelevant evidence, over objection, or, indeed, even ‘admissible evidence which generates an issue,’ the trial court may rule that the first party has ‘opened the door’ to evidence offered by the opposing party that previously would have been irrelevant, but has become relevant.
– Open Door- May be limited if probative value is substantially outweighed by
danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or by
considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative
evidence.
– Voir Dire- Not abuse of discretion where court asked pool whether, as a result of allegations, they “will be unable to listen fairly and impartially” instead of whether they had “strong feelings”

DAJUAN MARSHALL v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Wright, Filed Sept. 4, 2013,
http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2013/2500s11.pdf
Gang Statute- When charged under gang statute, CL § 9-801 et seq., “other bad acts” evidence allowable in order to prove crime.

Other note:
– When testimony is admissible during an original trial, it is admissible during a retrial

MARK JOHNSON v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Matricciani, Filed Sept. 5, 2013,
http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2013/2759s11.pdf
Re-Sentencing- Re-structuring a sentence is not a violation of due process where sentences (originally concurrent to later-invalidated sentences) each start no later than the date that the preceding, invalidated sentence would have commenced as originally imposed (An extension of the “transitive property of sentences”)

CARLOS TEIXEIRA v. STATE of MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Thieme, Filed Sept. 5, 2013,
http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2013/0388s12.pdf
Inconsistent Verdict- Analysis requires review of the the elements of the offenses as charged to the jury without regard to the proof that was actually presented at trial.

Other notes:
– Jury- A jury is not yet “dispersed” when they are stopped from leaving the jury room, even after giving a verdict