Legal Opinion · Dissent

Spence v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided August 10, 1983No. [No. 52, September Term, 1982.]Published

1DissentMurphy, C. J.

The Court today fashions a per se rule which requires a new trial whenever the trial judge announces a verdict before the defendant has either made or waived closing argument. In so doing, the majority creates a flat and absolute rule of constitutional dimension which is not recognized in any other jurisdiction. I, therefore, respectfully dissent.

The trial in this case was before the court, sitting without a jury. At the conclusion of the State’s case, Spence moved for a judgment of acquittal and argued in favor of the motion at some length. After the motion was denied, the defense presented…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Herring v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Ruedas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
  3. Yopps v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
  4. Louis West v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
  5. State v. HutchinsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970

28 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