Legal Opinion

State v. Wischhusen

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 10, 1996No. 100, Sept. Term, 1995PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RAKER Judge.

The question presented in this case is whether the trial court erred in failing to apply Maryland Rule 4-215, governing a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel, when the defendant agreed to proceed in the absence of counsel while the court considered a question raised by the jury during deliberations and subsequently reinstructed the jury. Although Rule 4-215 does not apply to waiver decisions made after trial has commenced, see State v. Brown, 342 Md. 404, 676 A.2d 513 (1996), we shall hold that the decision to waive the presence of counsel was tantamount to a waiver of the…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Mosley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  2. Taylor v. Giant of Maryland, LLCCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  3. State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  4. Smith v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  5. Gatewood v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2004

17 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