Legal Opinion

Darrikhuma v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 5, 1990No. 672, September Term, 1989PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CATHELL, Judge.

On appeal from his conviction for the offense of driving while intoxicated, appellant asserts that the trial court made three errors that mandate reversal. Those alleged errors are:

1. The court below erred in denying appellant’s motion to dismiss the charging document because appellant had not properly been served with it.

2. The court below erred in allowing into evidence the results of a breathalyzer test, where the record shows that said test was consented to by appellant without adequate knowledge of his rights.

3. The court below erred in limiting appellant in his…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Mills v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Dorsey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  3. Trusty v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  4. Simmons v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
  5. Bohnert v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hare v. Motor Vehicle AdministrationCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  2. Motor Vehicle Administration v. AtterbearyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  3. Kendall v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  4. Meanor v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  5. Al-Sabah v. World Business Lenders, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2020

2 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