Hubbard v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the CourtBattaglia, J.
Petitioners, Kevin Leon Hubbard and Gary Eugene Earl, Jr., seek review of a judgment of the Court of Special Appeals affirming the trial court’s granting of a mistrial based on manifest necessity. The trial judge had declared a mistrial over Petitioners’s objections because a witness, whose identification testimony against one defendant had been suppressed, was to be called by the State to testify against the co-defendant in a joint trial. We shall hold that the judge erred by declaring that a mistrial was manifestly necessary.
I. Introduction
Petitioners were indicted on December 11, 2002, in…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Wilder v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
- Harris v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- Simmons v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
- State v. FennellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
- State v. HartCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.