Legal Opinion

Jones v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 4, 2007No. 851, Sept. Term, 2005PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarbera, J.

The appellate courts of this State are regularly asked to consider whether in a given case there has been strict compliance with Maryland Rule 4-215, which governs the procedure by which a criminal defendant waives the constitutional right to representation by counsel. Typical appellate challenges ask whether the circuit court complied with the requirements of the rule when accepting a defendant’s express waiver of the right to counsel or determining that a defendant has waived the right to counsel by inaction. Less typical is the challenge that asks whether the court complied with the rule’s…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Snowden v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  5. Abeokuto v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Broadwater v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Jones v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  3. United States v. Marcel Aparicio-SoriaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
  4. Walker v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  5. Broadwater v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API