Legal Opinion

Hoey v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 5, 1988No. 11 September Term, 1986PublishedCited by 72 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COLE, Judge.

We shall answer three questions in this appeal: (1) Were the defendant’s confessions, under the circumstances presented, properly admitted at trial? (2) Was the testimony of a treating psychiatrist, introduced by the State to rebut the defendant’s proof of his lack of criminal responsibility, admissible when the State failed to disclose the expert witness to the defendant during discovery? and (3) Was it constitutional to place the burden of proof on the defendant to show that he was “not criminally responsible” for the crimes he committed?

We summarize the facts as follows. On…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Colorado v. ConnellySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Miller v. FentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by72 opinions

  1. Harris v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  2. Ball v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  3. Burch v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  4. Simmons v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
  5. Winder v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001

67 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