Legal Opinion

Boyd v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 7, 1996No. 40, 41, Sept. Term, 1995PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KARWACKI, Judge.

We granted certiorari in both of these cases to review the identical narrow question: is it an abuse of discretion for a trial judge to refuse a party’s request that the judge ask on voir dire whether any of the prospective jurors has a physical impairment hindering his or her performance as a juror? Under the common law of this State this Court will prescribe the juror voir dire process only as much as is necessary to establish that jurors meet minimum qualifications for service and to uncover disqualifying bias. Because Maryland statutory law requires that a thorough…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Casey v. Roman Catholic ArchbishopCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  2. Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Adams, Nelson, and Timanus v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1952
  4. Bedford v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  5. Gilchrist v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Dingle v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  2. State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Owens v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Hunt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. Perry v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996

36 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