Legal Opinion

State v. Johnson

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 30, 2012No. 0782PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoylan, J.

It is exceedingly difficult for a reviewing judge to be less than demanding. It somehow cuts against the judicial grain to accept that a conclusion one can prove ineluctably to be imperfect may nonetheless be adequate. Possessing such a talent, however, is a core value of the reviewing process.

We described in State v. Amerman, 84 Md.App. 461, 463, 581 A.2d 19 (1990), the tightly confined standard that constrains a suppression hearing judge when reviewing the earlier decision of another judge to issue a search and seizure warrant based on that first judge’s finding of probable cause:

The…

2Cases cited51 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Whittington v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2021
  2. Moats v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API