Unreported Opinions Are Citable For First Time in Maryland on about 70% of Unreported Appellate Court of Maryland Decisions (and The World Did Not End)
By Michael Wein[*]
The Maryland Supreme Court approved a Rules Change (the specifics below), effective July 1, 2023, which for first time permits litigants to cite previous Appellate decisions for their “persuasive” value. These have generally been available online on the Maryland Judiciary’s website since May of 2015 and searchable since that time in the Maryland Daily Record, as well as Lexis and Westlaw. The proposed Rules presentation discussing this from February 2023 can be found on the Blog here.
Below is the final wording of Rule 1-104. (Without annotations)1
The Numbers in July, August, September, and October 2023 on Unreported Opinions Citable versus Per Curiam, Which Remain Uncitable
Beginning July 1, 2023, every unreported Opinion by the Appellate Court of Maryland (ACM) (formerly Maryland Court of Special Appeals), with the exception of per curiam decisions, states: “This is an unreported opinion. This opinion may not be cited as precedent within the rule of stare decisis. It may be cited for its persuasive value only if the citation conforms to Rule 1-104(a)(2)(B).”
Although the Maryland Supreme Court did not adopt all the recommendations of the Maryland Rules Committee, (again detailed below and a link to the zoom meeting here), there was a potential major exception to Rule 1-104 requested by the intermediate Appellate Court, and adopted by the Rules Committee, that still prohibits all citations to “Per Curiam” decisions. This was noted in the early blog piece, as a major potential loophole in the Rules proposal of it “Does not apply to Per Curiam Opinions in General (“Judge Per Curiam”).
Read More…October 2023 Maryland Certiorari Grants
On October 23, 2023, the Supreme Court of Maryland granted certiorari in three criminal cases. The certiorari grants, with links to the Appellate Court of Maryland opinions under review, are below.
Read More…Special Appellate Panel: Fonts
By Chris Mincher, John Grimm, and Joe Dudek
Three weeks ago, the Maryland Supreme Court dropped a brief-writing bombshell by announcing that, for the first time in 26 years, it is revising the list of approved fonts. The change was prompted by this letter from Joe Dudek, but also follows multiple instances of font commentary here on the Maryland Appellate Blog: Chris Mincher took a walk through the Court’s typography requirements, including fonts, way back in 2014, and former Blog editor John Grimm offered his take on the Court’s font choices more recently in 2020.
To mark this milestone, we’ve invited Joe (specially assigned) and John (recalled) to join Chris for a special edition of our “Appellate Panel” digital roundtable discussions.
Read More…Stillbirth or Murder, and the Evidence of Internet Searches Regarding Abortion
In Akers v. State (September Term 2022, No. 0925), the Appellate Court of Maryland will decide, among other issues, whether information about abortion, pregnancy ambivalence, and lack of prenatal care is relevant to determining how the death of an infant occurred. The question is important and novel as it implicates a woman’s reproductive rights in the context of a criminal case post–Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
The facts of the case: The case arose out of Moira Akers’ unplanned pregnancy and death of her infant. Akers gave birth to an infant boy at her house. According to her, the child was stillborn. According to the State, the child was born alive and Ms. Akers suffocated her child. She was charged in the Circuit Court for Howard County with murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, and child abuse resulting in death. Following a jury trial, Ms. Akers was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 30 years imprisonment. The case is pending before the Appellate Court of Maryland.
Read More…SCM to Posthumously Admit Lawyer Excluded Because of Race
Except to occasionally cheer on a relative or law clerk crossing the threshold into lawyerdom, there’s usually not much reason to pay attention to the bar-admission special sessions at the Maryland Supreme Court — but don’t ignore a unique and important one coming up Thursday, October 26, 2023, at 3 p.m. That’s when the high court will consider the posthumous admission of Edward Garrison Draper, who is the earliest known individual found qualified to join the Maryland bar but rejected because of his race.
The session is the culmination of an effort to recognize Mr. Draper’s accomplishments and the historical injustice of his exclusion from Maryland’s legal profession. That was prompted by a compelling and informative University of Baltimore Law Forum article last year by Justice John G. Browning, formerly of the state Fifth District Court of Appeals in Texas.
In response, the Supreme Court invited Justice Browning, along with attorney Dominique A. Flowers and University of Baltimore law professor José F. Anderson, to submit a petition requesting Mr. Draper’s posthumous admission to the bar. I’ll briefly summarize the account of Mr. Draper as taken from Justice Browning’s article and the application for admission:
Read More…
Maryland Appellate Blog 