March 2019 Maryland Certiorari Grants

By Diane E. Feuerherd

Here are the writs of certiorari granted by the Court of Appeals today:

State of Maryland v. Philip Daniel Thomas – Case No. 73, September Term, 2018

(Reported CSA Opinion by Raker, J.)

Issue – Criminal Procedure – As a matter of first impression, is a sentence imposed on remand legal if the new sentence imposes the same or fewer years of imprisonment but results in a later parole eligibility date than the original sentence?

John Junek v. St. Mary’s County Department of Social Services – Case No. 74, September Term, 2018

(Unreported CSA Opinion by Battaglia, J.)

Issue – Family Law – Is intent or scienter an element of child neglect under Md. Code Ann., Family Law § 5-701(s)?

Davona Grant, et al. v. County Council of Prince George’s County sitting as the District Council, et al. – Case No. 75, September Term, 2018

(Unreported CSA Opinion by Friedman, J.)

Issues – Administrative Law – 1) Does Maryland administrative law authorize a zoning tribunal to vote to approve a special exception without deliberating on the factual issues and then delegate to its staff attorney the authority to make the required factual findings without informing the staff attorney of the factual basis of the tribunal’s decision? 2) If CSA is correct that the District Council’s staff “attorney prepared a draft opinion and showed it separately to individual members of the District Council” before the meeting, is such a process an “evasive device” which violates the Open Meeting Act? 3) Did the District Council err by exercising original jurisdiction when it reversed the Zoning Hearing Examiner’s decision?

Luke Daniel Johnson v. State of Maryland – Case No. 76, September Term, 2018

(CSA Order of Dismissal)

Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) Does Maryland Code Ann., Criminal Procedure, § 6-223(e)(4), which provides that a “finding under paragraph (2) of this subsection … is subject to appeal under Title 12, Subtitle 3 or Subtitle 4 of the Courts Article,” give a right of appeal to a probationer or defendant who receives and enhanced sentence based on a finding under paragraph (2) of § 6-223(e)? 2) Was the evidence presented at the hearing sufficient to rebut the presumption established by paragraph (1) of Crim. Proc. § 6-223(e), after consideration of the factors set forth in paragraph (2)? 3) Did the trial court err when it sentenced Petitioner to life in prison, suspending all but forty-six years with credit for time served, for his first technical violation of probation, without following necessary procedures, including compliance with Crim. Proc. § 6-223(d)(3)?

Donald Eugene Bailey v. State of Maryland – Case No. 77, September Term, 2018

(Unreported CSA Opinion by James R. Eyler, J., with a dissenting opinion by Friedman, J.)

Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) Did CSA err in holding that the trial court did not illegally impose an enhanced sentence after the State failed to serve timely notice under Md. Rule 4-245(b)? 2) If Petitioner’s sentence was not illegal, did CSA misapply the test for determining whether he received ineffective assistance of counsel?

Timothy Heidenberg v. Claudia Grier – Case No. 78, September Term, 2018

(CSA Order of Dismissal)

Issues – Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 1) Does Dawkins v. Balt. City Police Department, 376 Md. 53 (2003), preclude a parent immediate appellate review from the rejection of the doctrine of parent-child immunity? 2) Does the doctrine of parent-child immunity survive the death of a child?

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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: