Legal Opinion

Beverly v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 17, 1998No. 58, Sept. Term, 1997PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHASANOW, Judge.

In this case we are called upon to decide whether a trial court is bound to impose a mandatory minimum sentence pursuant to a subsequent offender statute where the defendant is a subsequent offender but there is a plea agreement whereby the State agreed not to treat the conviction as a subsequent offense. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the decision to pursue a mandatory minimum sentence under a subsequent offender statute is a matter of prosecutorial discretion, and the court is, therefore, not bound to impose a mandatory sentence if the prosecution either does…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. State v. BrockmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  5. Maus v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. State v. WilkinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  2. Oglesby v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  3. Dickey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  4. Wynn v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  5. Lathem v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017

31 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