Legal Opinion

Sinclair v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided July 27, 2015No. 43/14PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcDonald, J.

Petitioner Ronald Sinclair was convicted of various charges related to a carjacking. Part of the evidence against him was derived from a flip cell phone that was seized from him incident to his arrest — screen images that matched the custom wheel rims of the stolen car. He sought to exclude that evidence from his trial in an oral motion made by his attorney on the morning of trial. The Circuit Court allowed the use of that evidence and the Court of Special Appeals affirmed that decision. Before us, Mr. Sinclair relies on the Supreme Court’s intervening decision in Riley v. California, ___…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. United States v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Arizona v. GantSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  4. Riley v. Cal. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
  5. Wyoming v. HoughtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1999

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Moats v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2017
  2. Attorney Grievance v. YiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2020
  3. State v. CopesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2017
  4. Tunnell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2020
  5. Demby v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015

11 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