Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 30, 2020No. 2094/18PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

State of Maryland v. Karl Smith, No. 2094, September Term, 2018. Opinion by Fader, C.J. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — PLEA AGREEMENTS — MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENTS OF ACQUITTAL A trial court has no authority to grant a motion for judgment of acquittal during a pretrial hearing convened to decide whether to approve a plea agreement in a criminal case. If the court finds that a factual basis for the plea is lacking or otherwise finds the plea agreement deficient, then its options are as specified in Rules 4-242 and 4-243. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — COMMON LAW — DOUBLE JEOPARDY Double jeopardy principles do not bar…

2Cases cited79 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. McCarthy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Belton & Worsley v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2021
  2. Belton & Worsley v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2021
  3. Davis v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2025
  4. Santana v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2026
  5. Smith v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API