MSBA to Hold Networking Event and Panel Discussion on Impact Decisions of Maryland’s Appellate Courts
On Wednesday, April 3, 2024, the Litigation Section Appellate Practice Committee of the Maryland State Bar Association will host a networking event, followed by a panel discussion on several impact decisions of the 2023 term. Panelists will include civil and criminal appellate practitioners.
The event will be held at the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal building in Annapolis and begins at 5:30 p.m. Panelists include:
- The Honorable J. Bradford McCullough,
Circuit Court for Montgomery County - Douglas Nivens, II, Esq.
Office of the Public Defender, Appellate Division - Rachel Marblestone-Kamins, Esq.
Office of the Public Defender, Appellate Division - Jer Welter, Esq.
Chief Criminal Appeals Division, Maryland Office of the Attorney General
For more information and to register, visit the MSBA website.
The History of Family Relations on the Maryland Appellate Courts
On February 8, 2024, Governor Wes Moore appointed the Honorable Stephen Kehoe to fill the vacancy that his older brother, the Honorable Christopher Kehoe, created when he took senior status in August of last year. This judicial family affair led me to wonder whether there were other familial relationships amongst the judges on the appellate courts.
After Google and Wikipedia proved only marginally helpful, I decided to consult the real expert of Maryland judicial history—Chief Justice Joseph M. Getty. Unlike the supposed all-knowing internet, Chief Justice Getty did not disappoint. He offered three examples of blood relatives that have served on the Court as well as two additional pairs of judges who were related by marriage. Those judges are discussed below, with my thanks to Chief Justice Getty for his kind assistance.
Read More…Whren, Whren, Go Away…: Could the Days of the “Pretextual Traffic Stop” Be Numbered?
By Tia L. Holmes[*]
The “pretextual traffic stop”[1] issue appears to be on the minds of more and more lawyers and judges these days. The issue stems from a policing practice that was approved by the United States Supreme Court in Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996).[2] For decades, critics have expressed concern that Whren distorted or largely ignored the Fourth Amendment jurisprudence that preceded it, gutted Fourth Amendment protections for drivers and passengers, and authorized racial profiling[3] on America’s roadways.[4] These days, it is common to find briefs, scholarly works, and dissenting opinions decrying the policing practice. Even during an oral argument, it is difficult to avoid a discussion about pretextual traffic stops when the circumstances of a traffic stop are at issue.
Last year, I authored a post discussing Judge Dan Friedman’s concurrence in Snyder v. State, 2023 WL 1497289 (Feb. 3, 2023), in which he expressed his view that “Whren was wrong when it was decided in 1996 and remains both wrong and dangerous today.” My dedication to this issue has revealed that Judge Friedman is not alone. He joins dissenting judges throughout the country who also are concerned about Whren’s ongoing effects.[5] But judges have not only dissented. At least two states have declared pretextual traffic stops unconstitutional and departed from Whren on state constitutional grounds.[6] So, what does this mean for Maryland?
Read More…When a Woman’s Questions About Her Right to Choose Is Proof of Intent to Kill at Birth
In Akers v. State (September Term 2022, No. 0925) (unreported), Moira Akers searched the Internet for information about aborting her pregnancy. Akers’ pregnancy was in the first trimester, and she was within her rights to investigate her options to end it. She chose to continue the pregnancy. Still, her cell phone kept a digital record of her search history. Following the death of her newborn—which she maintained was stillborn during a home birth—the police seized her phone and reviewed her search history. At her trial for the first-degree murder of her infant, the prosecutor offered Akers’ search history as proof of her intent to kill the newborn infant. Akers objected, arguing that her questions about her right to lawfully terminate the pregnancy did not generate an inference of an intent to kill a newborn child at birth. In a case of first impression, the Appellate Court of Maryland (ACM) held that Akers’ Internet searches for abortion information made it more likely that she intended to kill her newborn child. The ACM cautioned that its holding “should be read narrowly, and in strict accordance with the specific facts of this case.” Still, the ACM’s decision implicates important questions about a woman’s reproductive rights in the context of a criminal case after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
Read More…Three Nominated for Eastern Shore ACM Vacancy
On January 12, 2024, the Appellate Courts Judicial Nominating Commission nominated two county administrative judges and a magistrate judge for the vacancy on the Appellate Court that will arise from the retirement of Judge Christopher B. Kehoe. This seat is for the First Appellate Judicial Circuit, which includes Caroline, Cecil, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Talbot, Wicomico and Worcester Counties. The nominees are:
Read More…Questions Remain About Self-Defense Jury Questions
There are very few dissents in the Appellate Court of Maryland: By my slapdash and amateurish count — which will have some built-in double-counting and so isn’t precisely accurate — out of 899 opinions of the court in 2023, there were only 7 dissents, meaning the panels disagree roughly 0.8 percent of the time. When one issue resurfaces in dissents twice within the same year, it’s worth taking note.
Byrd v. State, No. 1787, Sept. Term 2021 (App. Ct. Md. Jan. 23, 2023), last January contained some conflicting ink in regards to the “some evidence” standard to get a jury instruction relating to “imperfect self-defense,” an issue that was also in play recently in Hollins v. State, No. 2023, Sept. Term 2022 (App. Ct. Md. Dec. 14, 2023), albeit in regards to the alleged violent propensity of a witness. The case stems from a parking-lot fight between McDonald’s coworkers Isiah Hollins and Alexander Alvarenga that resulted in Mr. Hollins stabbing Mr. Alvarenga in the head six or seven times.
Read More…Case Update: Muldrow v. State.
On December 6, 2023, the Appellate Court of Maryland held that a trial court: 1) must voir dire the jury regarding bias against sexual orientation where it is likely to be an issue in the case; and 2) that a trial court must consider whether expert testimony is admissible under Daubert even where the testimony involves a “widely accepted” methodology. See Albert M. Muldrow, Jr. v. Maryland, _____ Md. App. ____, No. 1898, Sept. Term, 2021 (filed Dec. 6, 2023) (Getty, J.).
Read More…Denial of a Detail and Implied Fabrication under § CJP 10-923: A Matter of First Impression
In Green v. State (No. 0854, September Term 2022), the Appellate Court of Maryland (ACM) decided, as a matter of first impression, whether the defendant’s denial of just one of the elements of the offense amounts to an implied allegation of fabrication necessary for the admission of a prior sexually assaultive act under Cts. & Jud. Procs. (CJP) § 10-923. The ACM also applied the Maryland Supreme Court’s recent decision in Woodlin v. State, 484 Md. 253 (2023), to decide whether the probative value of Green’s prior sexually assaultive behavior was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
Read More…Meet the Applicants for the Appellate Court (First Appellate Judicial Circuit)
Seven applicants have applied for the Appellate Court vacancy that will be created by the retirement of Judge Christopher B. Kehoe. The First Appellate Judicial Circuit includes Caroline, Cecil, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Talbot, Wicomico and Worcester Counties.
The applicants are:
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…
Maryland Appellate Blog 