RAHUL GUPTA v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Nazarian, Apr. 28, 2016,
Miranda – Where suspect awaiting interrogation in holding cell screamed “I want a lawyer,” insufficient to trigger prohibition on questioning as interrogation had not yet begun.
Affirmed by CoA

Jury Communication – Harmless error where trial court responded to juror question of “how does it look” by having law clerk
respond that court would deal with issue later and trial would not stand in the way of pre-existing plans, even where court should have advised parties prior to responding. Parties eventually addressed issue.

Impeachment – No error where witness to stabbing could not be “impeached” with evidence that she carried a camping knife (not the murder weapon) for protection after testifying that she was “not capable” of stabbing someone.

Other legal claims are unique to the factual situation here:
– “Missing evidence” instruction (that really wasn’t one)
– Confrontation of witness (that really wasn’t a denial of confrontation)