Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 7, 1995No. 70PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KARWACKI, Judge.

In this case we granted certiorari to decide whether a new trial, rather than a limited remand, is required when a trial court fails to conduct a sufficient inquiry to determine whether a criminal defendant’s reasons for appearing at trial without counsel are meritorious before ruling that the defendant had waived the right to counsel by inaction. For the reasons set forth below, we shall hold that a new trial is required under these circumstances.

I

David Mitchell, the petitioner, was charged with theft, eluding the police, and driving on a revoked license. On February 5, 1993,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. United States v. James David KimmelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  3. Maus v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  4. Gill v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1972
  5. Martinez v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  2. Farmers' Bank & Trust Co. of Hardinsburg v. Atchison, T. & S. F. RY. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  3. Broadwater v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Boulden v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  5. Richardson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004

16 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