Legal Opinion

Gibson v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 10, 1994No. 92PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McAuliffe, Judge.

The defendant, Ronald Gibson, claims error and seeks a new trial because a judge other than the trial judge supervised the deliberations of the jury for a period of about one hour while the trial judge was absent. We find no merit in the claim, and affirm the judgment below.

I

On 8 February 1992, a police officer, stationed in a concealed location in a known drug trafficking area in Baltimore City, observed the defendant purchase several vials of cocaine from an unidentified individual. The defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with possession of a controlled…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. People v. GonzalezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
  3. United States v. Nicholas Lasorsa and Salvatore CaioCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
  4. Halko v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1961
  5. State v. HallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hood v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  2. White v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API