Martin v. State
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
WILNER, Judge.
In Stevens v. State, 232 Md. 33, 192 A.2d 73, cert. denied, 375 U.S. 886, 84 S.Ct. 160, 11 L.Ed.2d 115 (1963), the Court of Appeals concluded that it was not “essential for the protection of a defendant’s constitutional rights that he be advised by the court of his right against self-incrimination when he is represented by counsel.” Id., 39, 192 A.2d 73. We said the same thing in State v. McKenzie, 17 Md.App. 563, 303 A.2d 406 (1973).
Both courts intimated, however, that where the defendant is proceeding without counsel, the trial court did have some duty in this regard. In…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Curtis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- Stevens v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- United States v. Robert MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Hutcherson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1994
- Morales v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Sutton v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- State v. TuplinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2006
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.