Legal Opinion
Howell v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided October 19, 1976No. [No. 13, September Term, 1976.]PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Murphy, C. J., dissents and filed a dissenting opinion at page 396 infra.
We shall here hold that a tear gas pistol is not a handgun within the meaning of Maryland Code (1957,1976 Repl. Vol.) Art. 27, § 36F.
Appellant, Lowell Douglas Howell, Jr. (Howell), and another were convicted in Baltimore County on a number of charges including the unlawful use of a handgun in the commission of a crime in violation of Art. 27, § 36B (d). The convictions were affirmed in Howell and Kaschenbach v. State, 29 Md. App. 646, 350 A. 2d 145 (1976). We granted the writ of certiorari limited solely to the question…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Tot v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- State v. FabritzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Cearfoss v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1875
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Insurance CommissionerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- United States v. Stoy Decker and Robert Matthew CoxCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1961
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Wheeler v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Schweitzer v. BrewerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- Lusby v. LusbyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Holbrook v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- State v. MillettSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.