In Re Billy W.
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
BATTAGLIA, J. as to Part I.
In this action between the biological parents and the State, we have been asked to consider whether the trial court properly admitted hearsay testimony by a social worker and two Court Appointed Special Advocates 1 during a hearing to review the permanency plans for children who had been declared in need of assistance. Because we have held that application of the Maryland Rules of Evidence is not mandatory in permanency planning hearings, the Circuit Court did not commit error in admitting hearsay testimony from the social worker and the Court Appointed Special…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Town of Somerset v. Montgomery County Board of AppealsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
- Whittlesey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- In Re Yve S.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
- In Re Mark M.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Woods v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Tutein v. ArteagaSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2014
- In re Cody H.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2017
- In Re Joseph N.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
- Bartlett v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLCCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
- In re: J.J. and T.S.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2016
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.