Legal Opinion

Jones v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 25, 1970No. 92, September Term, 1970PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOrth, J.

ESTABLISHING CRIMINAL AGENCY

The criminal agency of an accused may be proved directly, as for example by his identification by the victim, Thomas v. State, 8 Md. App. 5, or an eyewitness, Pinkney v. State, 9 Md. App. 283, or circumstantially, as for example by his possession of stolen goods.* 1 The identification of an accused by the victim or an eyewitness may be made judicially or extra judicially. A judicial identifi cation is admissible if it was not tainted by an illegal extrajudicial identification or even if there was an illegal extrajudicial identification, upon the State showing by…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Smith v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  5. Kucharczyk v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Pittman v. Atlantic Realty Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  2. State v. LawlessCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1971
  3. Bailey v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1972
  4. DeLilly v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1971
  5. King v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1973

14 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