NATHANIEL SMITH, SR. v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Kehoe, Filed Nov. 25, 2015,
Stipulation – Where the defendant stipulated to an element of the crime, no error where the State failed to read the stipulation into evidence prior to resting its case in chief (but it was read by the court prior to deliberation).

Improper Argument – Calling defense case “smoke and mirrors” was not improper argument

Regulated Firearm – Disqualifying Crime – Predicate – When a defendant admits or the parties stipulate to the previous-conviction element of a charge under [the predecessor to PS § 5-133], the trial judge should inform the jury that the defendant admits that he or she has been convicted of a [disqualifying] crime. Citing Carter v. State

Regulated Firearm – Disqualifying Crime – Predicate – The name or nature of a previous conviction must always be withheld from the jury in a felon-in-possession case where the defendant offered to stipulate or admit to the conviction. Citing Carter v. State (explaining that “when the defendant admits or the parties stipulate to the previous-conviction… the trial judge should inform the jury that the defendant admits that he or she has been convict
ed of a crime for which he or she is prohibited from possessing a regulated firearm under the law.”)