Legal Opinion

Foreman v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 4, 1999No. 907, Sept. Term, 1998PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MURPHY, Chief Judge.

As a general rule, extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior oral inconsistent statement is admissible if (1) the contents of the statement and the circumstances under which it was made, including the persons to whom it was made, are disclosed to the witness, (2) the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny it, and (3) the witness has failed to admit having made the statement. Md. Rule 5-613(a) and (b). In criminal cases, however, there is what has become known as the Spence-Bradley exception to this general rule:

[ A] defendant is denied a fair trial if the State…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. InadiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Nance v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Stewart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  4. In Re Rachel T.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1988
  5. Bradley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Walker v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2002
  2. Bryant v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API