JOHN W. GREEN, III v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Graeff, Dec. 1, 2016,
Discovery – Pre-Trial Identification – 4-263 requires that the State disclose pretrial “identification of the defendant by a State’s witness”, not identification of a co-defendant.
DIMONIQUE S. ANDERSON v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Thieme, Filed Apr. 27, 2016,
Jury Argument – Defense closing argument stating, “[w]ould you feel as if justice were done i[f] your family member or you were in that chair based on this evidence?,” impermissibly undermined the reasonable doubt instruction by personalizing the verdict.
STATE OF MARYLAND v. JACOB BIRCHER
Court of Appeals, Battaglia (Plurality), Feb. 23, 2016,
Jury Instruction – Supplemental Instruction – Where supplemental instruction introduced new prosecution theory, upheld where defendant was allowed supplemental closing argument and no prejudice occurred.
(Dissent – Watts, Barbera and Adkins Join – Supplemental jury instruction has a “special potential for prejudice” and did so in this case)
Continue reading