Maryland Certiorari Grants and Other Docket Developments

By Steve Klepper (Twitter: @MDAppeal)

We’ve been posting (here and here) about apparent changes in the timing of certiorari grants by the Court of Appeals of Maryland. It’s becoming clear that the Court of Appeals will now be granting certiorari as soon as the judges decide a case is worthy of review. They will not be waiting for their monthly conferences, which are likely to focus on closer calls that warrant discussion. Yesterday, the court posted its second pre-conference batch of certiorari grants for November. It also recently accepted a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

In other news affecting the Court of Appeals docket, The Daily Record’s Steve Lash reported yesterday (from behind the paywall) that Glenn Grossman is retiring as Bar Counsel on January 31, 2017. We don’t usually cover Attorney Grievance Commission cases here at the blog, but it’s important to remember that those cases represent a significant part of the court’s business.

The new certiorari grants and the certified question are listed (with questions presented) after the jump.

State of Maryland v. Anthony Allen Crawley – Case No. 65, September Term, 2016

Issue – Criminal Law – Did CSA improperly vacate Respondent’s corrected sentence, where the trial court, pursuant to Greco v. State, 427 MD. 477 (2012), corrected the illegality in Respondent’s sentence by the addition of a period of probation in order to effectuate the split sentence imposed in the case?

County Council of Prince George’s County, MD sitting as the District Council v. Chaney Enterprises Limited Partnership et al. – Case No. 66, September Term, 2016

Issues – Land Use – 1) Does § 22-407 of the Land Use Article (“L.U.”) and Md. Rule 7-201, et seq., authorize the filing of a petition for judicial review as a modality to maintain a judicial challenge to an area master plan? 2) Does L.U. § 22-407 and Md. Rule 7-201 et seq., authorize a non-party to an agency proceeding approving an area master plan to file a petition for judicial review as a modality to maintain a judicial challenge to the approved plan? 3) Does Anne Arundel Co. v. Bell, 442 Md. 539 (2015) require Respondents to demonstrate taxpayer standing in order to maintain a judicial challenge to an area master plan? 4) Did Respondents fail to exhaust administrative remedies? 5) Did CSA err when it invalidated Petitioner’s area master plan? 6) Are the mining restrictions, including the categorical ban on mining, imposed by Petitioners through amendments to the Subregion 5 Master Plan are preempted by the comprehensive and all-encompassing State law regulatory scheme governing surface mining?

Parameshwar Mahasreshti v. Matthew Miller, et al. – Misc. No. 12, September Term, 2016

Certified Question from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland

Questions – 1) Is a complaint filed in the name of a deceased individual plaintiff prior to the expiration of limitations null and void ab initio? 2) Can the decedent’s estate be substituted as plaintiff after the expiration of limitations to avoid dismissal on limitations grounds?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: