Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Broadwater v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Accord Broadwater, 401 Md. at 182 (“Strict, not substantial, compliance with the advisement and inquiry terms of the Rule is required in order to support a valid waiver.”). 2010Therefore, “[sjtrict, not substantial, compliance with the advisement and inquiry terms of the Rule is required in order to support a valid waiver.” Id. | 2 | 3 |
Moten v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See Broadwater, 401 Md. at 182 , 931 A.2d at 1102 ("Strict, not substantial, compliance with the advisement and inquiry terms of the Rule is required in order to support a valid waiver." (citing Moten v. State, 339 Md. 407, 411 , 663 A.2d 593, 596 (1995))). 2009See Broadwater, 401 Md. at 182 , 931 A.2d at 1102 ("Strict, not substantial, compliance with the advisement and inquiry terms of the Rule is required in order to support a valid waiver." (citing Moten v. State, 339 Md. 407, 411 , 663 A.2d 593, 596 (1995))). | 2 | 2 |
Webb v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance 2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance | 1 | 2 |
Gonzales v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance 2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance | 1 | 1 |
Evans v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Moten v. State, 339 Md. 407, 411 , 663 A.2d 593, 596 (1995) (holding that strict compliance with Rule 4-215 is mandatory and that a trial judge’s failure to inform a defendant of the allowable penalties for the offenses charged in the indictment cannot constitute harmless error); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741, 742 , 800 A.2d 42, 49 (2002) (finding a failure to comply with Rule 4-215 where the nature of the charges were explained to the defendant by the State’s Attorney and not the trial judge); Evans v. State, 84 Md.App. 573, 580 , 581 A.2d 435, 438 (1990). 2007Moten v. State, 339 Md. 407, 411 , 663 A.2d 593, 596 (1995) (holding that strict compliance with Rule 4-215 is mandatory and that a trial judge’s failure to inform a defendant of the allowable penalties for the offenses charged in the indictment cannot constitute harmless error); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741, 742 , 800 A.2d 42, 49 (2002) (finding a failure to comply with Rule 4-215 where the nature of the charges were explained to the defendant by the State’s Attorney and not the trial judge); Evans v. State, 84 Md.App. 573, 580 , 581 A.2d 435, 438 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Motor Vehicle Administration v. Seenath
green
1 sentence2020Cf. Seenath, 448 Md. at 186–87 (“[W]e 8 We have addressed a similar question in the Miranda context. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Gregg v. State
green
2 sentences2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance 2010See Gonzales, 408 Md. at 530 , 970 A.2d 908 (“Maryland Rule 4-215 ensures that a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing and voluntary by setting forth mandatory procedures that a trial court in this State must follow when a defendant seeks to assert this right”); Gregg, 377 Md. at 554 , 833 A.2d 1040 (“[T]he trial court must comply with Rule 4-215 in order for defendant’s waiver of counsel to be effective”); Webb v. State, 144 Md.App. 729, 741 , 800 A.2d 42 (2002) (recognizing that “only full compliance by the trial court will suffice, and the record must reflect such compliance | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.