Jones v. State
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
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
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Snowden v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
- Abeokuto v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Broadwater v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Jones v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- United States v. Marcel Aparicio-SoriaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Walker v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
- Broadwater v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.