Maryland Courts

PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

September Term, 2010

 

Denied March 21, 2011

Betz v. Alicks - Pet. Docket No. 551
Boston v. CSX - Pet. Docket No. 526
Brown, Jimmy Morgan v. State - Pet. Docket No. 470
Butcher, Edward v. State - Pet. Docket No. 566
Canavan v. Prince George's County - Pet. Docket No. 548
Deyesu v. Deyesu - Pet. Docket No. 586
East Coast Flooring v. TPC - Pet. Docket No. 576
Farmer, Brian Mark v. State - Pet. Docket No. 550
Ford, Charles B. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 546
Gaston v. Officer Jenkins - Pet. Docket 589
Gatewood, Bland v. State - Pet. Docket No. 580
Gaylord, Carroll Kevin v. State - Pet. Docket No. 502
Getka v. Cole - Pet. Docket No. 499
Harding, Gregory v. State - Pet. Docket No. 427
Hartley, Terrell v. State - Pet. Docket No. 524 (and cross-petition)
Hawkins, Ganee L. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 516 (and cross-petition)
In Re: Trinity Q. - Pet. Docket No. 296 (motion for reconsideration)
Jarvis, Derek N. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 569
Johnson v. Bank of America - Pet. Docket No. 562
Jones, Jeremiah v. State - Pet. Docket No. 583
Lay, John R. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 344 (motion for reconsideration)
Legrand, Pierre Omar v. State - Pet. Docket No. 554
Lloyd v. Parole Commission - Pet. Docket No. 512
Low v. Executive Terrace - Pet. Docket No. 557
Massey, Reginald D. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 549
McNeil, Rudolph v. State - Pet. Docket No. 434 (motion for reconsideration)
Mead v. Mueller - Pet. Docket No. 552
Nelson v. Dept. of Health - Pet. Docket No. 565
Nelson, Carl E. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 585
Osowiecki v. Mardela Springs - Pet. Docket No. 335 (motion for reconsideration)
Pro Tech v. Martinez - Pet. Docket No. 544
Rahman, Raheem A. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 588
Roberts, Robert D. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 568
Santillana v. Silva - Pet. Docket No. 545
Sentell v. Hanfman - Pet. Docket No. 559
Serabian v. Rose - Pet. Docket No. 422 (motion for reconsideration)
Tankeu v. WMATA - Pet. Docket No. 542
Taylor, Telvon v. State - Pet. Docket No. 537
Titus, Gerald Thomas Jr. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 450
Welch v. Welch - Pet. Docket No. 556
Wiley v. Jaffe - Pet. Docket No. 563

 

Granted March 18, 2011

Consolidated Waste Industries, Inc. v. Standard Equipment Company - Case No. 143, Sept. Term 2010.

ISSUES - TORTS - (1) WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN GRANTING THE APPELLEE’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF SUBSEQUENT REPAIRS? (2) WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN GRANTING APPELLEE’S REQUESTED VERDICT SHEET (QUESTIONS 5 & 6)?

Curtis, Lamont v. State - Case No. 147, Sept. Term 2010.

ISSUES - CRIMINAL LAW - (1) IS AN ORDER DENYING A PETITION FOR WRIT OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE WITHOUT A HEARING AN AUTOMATICALLY APPEALABLE ORDER? (2) DID TRIAL JUDGE ERRONEOUSLY DENY APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR WRIT OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE WITHOUT A HEARING IN VIOLATION OF SEC. 8-301 OF THE CRIM. PROC. TITLE OF THE MD. CODE?

Douglas, Ellis Richard Jr. v. State - Case No. 146, Sept. Term 2010.

ISSUES - CRIMINAL LAW - (1) IS AN ORDER DENYING A PETITION FOR WRIT OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE WITHOUT A HEARING AN AUTOMATICALLY APPEALABLE ORDER? (2) DID TRIAL JUDGE ERRONEOUSLY DENY APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR WRIT OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE WITHOUT A HEARING IN VIOLATION OF SEC. 8-301 OF THE CRIM. PROC. TITLE OF THE MD. CODE?

Greenberg, Roger Mandel v. State - Case No. 144, September Term 2010.

ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT COMMIT PREJUDICIAL ERROR IN ADMITTING THE TESTIMONY OF APPELLANT’S FORMER CIVIL ATTORNEY IN VIOLATION OF THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE WHEN IT ERRONEOUSLY HELD THAT APPELLANT CATEGORICALLY WAIVED ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AT TRIAL BY TESTIFYING IN AN EARLIER ANNULMENT PROCEEDING ABOUT COMMUNICATIONS WITH HIS ATTORNEY & BY FAILING TO OBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY’S TESTIMONY AT THE SAME PROCEEDING?

In Re: Leah J. - Case No. 148, September Term 2010.

ISSUES - CINA - (1) DID THE COURT ERR IN CHANGING THE PERMANENCY PLAN FROM REUNIFICATION TO ADOPTION? (2) DID THE LOWER COURT ACT OUTSIDE ITS APPELLATE JURISDICTION IN ISSUING AN ORDER ENJOINING A JUVENILE COURT FROM CONDUCTING PROCEEDINGS IN A CASE FROM WHICH NO APPEAL HAS BEEN TAKEN? (3) DID THE LOWER COURT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN ENTERING AN INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL WHERE THE MOVANT HAD NOT DEMONSTRATED A LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS OR SATISFIED THE PROCEDURAL & OTHER SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 8-425?

In Re: Leah J. - Case No. 149, September Term 2010.

ISSUE - CINA

Jefferson, Brandon J. v. State - Case No. 142, September Term 2010.

ISSUES - CRIMINAL LAW - (1) SHOULD APPELLANT’S SENTENCE & CONVICTION FOR SEC. 5-133(b) OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ART. BE VACATED WHERE THE SECTION LACKS A PENALTY PROVISION & THEREFORE IS NOT A CRIME WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIAL COURT? (2) WAS A TERM OF IMPRISONMENT OF FIVE YEARS WITHOUT PAROLE AN ILLEGAL SENTENCE FOR A VIOLATION OF SEC. 5-133(b)?

Kim, Charles Y. v. Maryland State Board of Physicians - Case No. 1, Sept. Term 2011.

ISSUES - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - (1) SHOULD THE BOARD OF PHYSICIANS (BOP) BE PERMITTED TO USE INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH THE CASE RESOLUTION CONFERENCE? (2) IS COMPLETING A RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A PHYSICIAN’S LICENSE ACTING “IN THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE”? (3) SHOULD THE BOP BE PERMITTED TO CHARGE & PUNISH A PHYSICIAN FOR “WILLFULLY” MAKING FALSE REPRESENTATIONS WHEN THE PHYSICIAN DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE QUESTIONS POSED?

Stabb, Kenneth Gerald v. State - Case No. 2, Sept. Term 2011.

ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN INSTRUCTING THE JURY THAT THERE IS NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT THE STATE UTILIZE ANY SPECIFIC INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE OR SCIENTIFIC TEST TO PROVE ITS CASE?

State v. Bryan Stivells - Case No. 3, Sept. Term 2011.

ISSUES - CRIMINAL LAW - (1) WHETHER THE INVITED RESPONSE DOCTRINE PERMITS THE PROSECUTOR TO RESPOND TO A “DIRECT & SPECIFIC ATTACK ON A POLICE OFFICER WITNESS’ VERACITY”? (2) DID THE LOWER COURT MISINTERPRET THE “OPENED DOOR” DOCTRINE, AS THIS COURT HAS APPLIED IT TO CLOSING ARGUMENTS BY HOLDING IT INAPPLICABLE TO STATEMENTS FOUND TO BE IMPROPER VOUCHING? (3) DID THE LOWER COURT FAIL TO ADEQUATELY DEFINE THE LIMITS OF APPROPRIATE CLOSING ARGUMENT BY HOLDING THAT THE MAJORITY OF DEFENSE COUNSEL’S CLOSING ARGUMENT WAS PROPER IN SPITE OF COUNSEL’S DISCUSSION OF FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE & REPEATED ASSERTIONS OF HIS PERSONAL OPINION OF THE POLICE OFFICERS’ INTEGRITY & THE STRENGTH OF THE STATE’S CASE?

Tydings and Rosenberg, LLP v. John Zorzit, et al. - Case No. 145, Sept, Term 2010.

ISSUE - FAMILY LAW - SHOULD THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN PERMITTED TO INTERVENE, FILE & PURSUE ITS COMPLAINT OF INTERVENOR AGAINST THE DEFENDANT IN A DIVORCE ACTION TO RECOVER COUNSEL FEES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECS. 7-107(f) ET AL. OF THE FAMILY LAW ART., MD CODE?

 

Denied March 14, 2011

Fasusi v. Buonassissi - Pet. Docket No. 9*

 

 

 

 

* September Term 2011