Legal Opinion

State v. Gray

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 15, 1997No. 15PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KARWACKI, Judge.

The issue presented in this case is whether the introduction of a nontestifying codefendant’s confession implicating a defendant and others, which is redacted to exclude the names of all those involved in the crime, other than the confessor, by using the words “deleted” and “deletion,” violates a defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, even if the jury is instructed to consider the confession only against the codefendant-confessor? We shall hold that under the circumstances in this case it does not and reverse…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Gray v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Merzbacher v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  3. Darnita McGhee v. Joan Yukins, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
  4. Robinson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. State v. JeffersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1997

9 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