Legal Opinion

Winebrenner v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 26, 1969No. 318, September Term, 1968PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOrth, J.

This case provides an example of one in which evidence was improperly admitted as obtained by a search and seizure not shown to be reasonable because the prosecution did not sufficiently establish the validity of a warrantless arrest. Thus, although it is clear that the evidence before the court at the court trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County was sufficient to sustain the conviction of the appellant of the felony of selling amphetamine proscribed by Md. Code, Art. 27, § 313B (a) as in effect at the time of the commission of the crime on 1 June 1968, 1 we are compelled on review…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Beck v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Farrow v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  3. Robinson v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  4. Mullaney v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  5. Hutchinson v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1967

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Cleveland v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  2. English v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  3. Hepple v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  4. Johnson v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  5. Sands v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1970

15 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