Dingle v. State

I respectfully dissent from the Court’s holding that the trial court somehow abdicated its role and function in conducting *22pretrial voir dire of the venire and, in so doing, committed an error requiring the reversal of Petitioner’s convictions. The rationale relied upon by the majority constitutes a revision of Maryland’s voir dire jurisprudence, and the decision today effectively overrules at least two of this Court’s more recent precedents in this area of the law.1 Most importantly, today’s decision significantly circumscribes the previously broad discretion that this Court, over the course…