Legal Opinion
Skinner v. State
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Decided August 10, 1972No. 529, September Term, 1971PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoylan, J.
Even the most conscientious police find it difficult to please convicted defendants. The almost universal plaint, following a successful warrantless search of an automobile, is that the police should have immobilized the car and then obtained a warrant for its search. In the case at bar, they did just that. Unpropitiated, the appellant, Michael Thomas Skinner, still manages to complain.
At his trial before Judge William Travers and a jury in the Circuit Court for Wicomico County, following removal from Baltimore County, the appellant was convicted of 1) receiving stolen goods, 2) possession of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Chambers v. MaroneySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Robinson v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Beard v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1889
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- McMillian v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Stanley v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1974
- Bremer v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1973
- Mobley and King v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
- State v. ReisSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1981
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.