Redman v. State
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
September Term, 1974.]
1Opinion of the CourtMoylan, J.
This case involves the requirement that a defendant be present when testimony is taken at a pretrial suppression hearing. Article 5 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights established the requirement that an accused be present at his trial. Duffy v. State, 151 Md. 456, 135 A. 189; Plump v. Warden, 220 Md. 662, 153 A. 2d 269; Grohman v. State, 248 Md. 552, 267 A. 2d 193; Young v. State, 5 Md. App. 383, 247 A. 2d 751. In implementing this common law provision, enshrined in our Declaration of Rights, Maryland Rule 775 provides:'
“The accused shall be present at the arraignment, at every stage of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Brookhart v. JanisSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Midgett v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
- People v. AndersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
- State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1972
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hughes v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
- Samson v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Commonwealth v. McLaurinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Haley v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Sewell v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1977
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.