Legal Opinion

Burnside v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided July 11, 2018No. 71/17PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreene, J.

In this case we must decide whether it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to choose to wait until after the defendant testified before ruling on the admissibility of the defendant's prior conviction for purposes of impeachment. Maryland Rule 5-609 (" Rule 5-609" or "the Rule") permits the admission of prior convictions for impeachment purposes, so long as the conviction is within the class of convictions concerning credibility, 15 years have not elapsed since the conviction and the probative value of the conviction outweighs its prejudicial effect. The Rule embodies our respect…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Trump v. HawaiiSupreme Court of the United States · 2018
  4. United States v. Otha Lee MahoneCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
  5. Prout v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Rosales v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2019
  2. State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2024
  3. Rosales v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2019
  4. State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API