Maryland Public Defender Decisions: New Developments

Yesterday the Court of Appeals posted an order granting certiorari in Clyburn v. Richmond, limited to the following three questions:

1. Did the circuit court err in entering an injunction directing officials of the District Court to conduct initial appearances in a manner inconsistent with the existing rules promulgated by this Court?

2. Did the circuit court err in granting an application for supplemental relief based on a prior declaratory judgment without first issuing a show cause order, as required by the statute governing such applications?

3. Did the circuit court err in ordering officials of the District Court to appoint counsel for all arrestees at initial appearances and prohibiting those court officials from conducting initial appearances for arrestees who were not provided with counsel?

Argument has been set for March 7, 2014.  This blog has provided extensive analysis (see below) of the DeWolfe v. Richmond decisions regarding the right to counsel at bail hearings. We’ll be providing commentary on Clyburn v. Richmond — including the implications for DeWolfe v. Richmond — as details develop.

Related Posts

• Alan Sternstein, DeWolfe v. Richmond: State Law or Just Law?
• Kevin Arthur, Who Is on the Court Of Appeals: The Role of Retired Judges
• Kevin Arthur, The Public Defender Opinion: The Implications of Resting on State-Law Grounds