9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Hamilton v. City Court of City of Mesagreen2 sentences2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 | 3 | 3 |
State v. Blackwellgreen2 sentences2024Following Ragland, Blackwell considered whether an officer needed to be qualified as an expert to testify about his administration of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (“HGN”) test, a field sobriety test administered upon drunk driving suspects, in which the test administrator looks for signs of inadvertent eye movement while the subject is directed to look in different directions, was expert testimony, “emphasizing that the HGN test is a scientific test[.]” 408 Md. at 681 , 971 A.2d at 298 . 2024Following Ragland, Blackwell considered whether an officer needed to be qualified as an expert to testify about his administration of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (“HGN”) test, a field sobriety test administered upon drunk driving suspects, in which the test administrator looks for signs of inadvertent eye movement while the subject is directed to look in different directions, was expert testimony, “emphasizing that the HGN test is a scientific test[.]” 408 Md. at 681 , 971 A.2d at 298 . | 2 | 5 |
State v. Bressongreen2 sentences2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 | 2 | 3 |
State v. Armstronggreen2 sentences2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 | 2 | 2 |
City of Fargo v. McLaughlingreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 707 (N.D.1994) ("Through specialized training in HGN, the officer is able to draw inferences and deductions from his observations of the accused that might elude laypersons."); see also Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 150 , 664 A.2d at 62 (recognizing that even among those trained to administer the HGN test, "`the level of competency... is wide-ranging'" (quoting Stephanie E. 2009See, e.g., Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 707 (N.D.1994) ("Through specialized training in HGN, the officer is able to draw inferences and deductions from his observations of the accused that might elude laypersons."); see also Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 150 , 664 A.2d at 62 (recognizing that even among those trained to administer the HGN test, "`the level of competency... is wide-ranging'" (quoting Stephanie E. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Garrettgreen2 sentences1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I 1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 2 | 2 |
Whitson v. Stategreen2 sentences1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I 1995See also Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 S.W.2d 794 (1993) (Frye standard not used, holding that HGN test was not novel because of its use by law enforcement officials for over thirty-five years). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Sullivangreen2 sentences1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I 1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 2 | 2 |
Wilson v. Stategreen2 sentences2009But see Wilson v. State, 124 Md.App. 543, 553 , 723 A.2d 494, 498 (1999) (holding that the HGN test may not be used to estimate a specific blood alcohol content). 2009But see Wilson v. State, 124 Md.App. 543, 553 , 723 A.2d 494, 498 (1999) (holding that the HGN test may not be used to estimate a specific blood alcohol content). | 1 | 2 |
Schultz v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See, e.g., Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 707 (N.D.1994) ("Through specialized training in HGN, the officer is able to draw inferences and deductions from his observations of the accused that might elude laypersons."); see also Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 150 , 664 A.2d at 62 (recognizing that even among those trained to administer the HGN test, "`the level of competency... is wide-ranging'" (quoting Stephanie E. 2009See, e.g., Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 707 (N.D.1994) ("Through specialized training in HGN, the officer is able to draw inferences and deductions from his observations of the accused that might elude laypersons."); see also Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 150 , 664 A.2d at 62 (recognizing that even among those trained to administer the HGN test, "`the level of competency... is wide-ranging'" (quoting Stephanie E. | 1 | 2 |
People v. Leahygreen2 sentences1995Ex parte Malone, 575 So.2d 106 (Ala.1990) (Alabama’s Supreme Court reversed, holding that, because it was scientific in nature, the admission of the HGN test without a foundation was not harmless); People v. Leahy, 8 Cal.4th 587 , 34 Cal.Rptr.2d 663 , 882 P.2d 321 (1994); Foster v. State, 204 Ga.App. 632 , 420 S.E.2d 78 (1992) (HGN test required a foundation but the error in failing to lay the foundation was harmless in light of other evidence.); People v. Vega, 145 Ill.App.3d 996 , 99 Ill.Dec. 808 , 496 N.E.2d 501 (1986) (HGN test required a Frye foundation to be laid; later cases determined 1995Ex parte Malone, 575 So.2d 106 (Ala.1990) (Alabama’s Supreme Court reversed, holding that, because it was scientific in nature, the admission of the HGN test without a foundation was not harmless); People v. Leahy, 8 Cal.4th 587 , 34 Cal.Rptr.2d 663 , 882 P.2d 321 (1994); Foster v. State, 204 Ga.App. 632 , 420 S.E.2d 78 (1992) (HGN test required a foundation but the error in failing to lay the foundation was harmless in light of other evidence.); People v. Vega, 145 Ill.App.3d 996 , 99 Ill.Dec. 808 , 496 N.E.2d 501 (1986) (HGN test required a Frye foundation to be laid; later cases determined | 1 | 2 |
Ragland v. Stategreen2 sentences2009Relying on Ragland v. State, 385 Md. 706 , 870 A.2d 609 (2005), the intermediate appellate court held that Linger's testimony about the HGN test constituted expert testimony, the admission of which, without qualification by the trial court, was erroneous and warranted remand for a new trial. 2009Relying on Ragland v. State, 385 Md. 706 , 870 A.2d 609 (2005), the intermediate appellate court held that Linger's testimony about the HGN test constituted expert testimony, the admission of which, without qualification by the trial court, was erroneous and warranted remand for a new trial. | 1 | 1 |
Trimble v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See Trimble v. State, 300 Md. 387, 404 , 478 A.2d 1143, 1151 (1984) (recognizing that "questions of the qualifications of expert witnesses are for the court to decide as a preliminary matter of law"); McLAIN, MARYLAND EVIDENCE, § 702:4 ("Before a witness properly may be asked a question that calls for expert testimony, the witness' qualifications must be proved and the witness proffered to the court and accepted by it ... as an expert in the relevant field." (footnote omitted)). 2009See Trimble v. State, 300 Md. 387, 404 , 478 A.2d 1143, 1151 (1984) (recognizing that "questions of the qualifications of expert witnesses are for the court to decide as a preliminary matter of law"); McLAIN, MARYLAND EVIDENCE, § 702:4 ("Before a witness properly may be asked a question that calls for expert testimony, the witness' qualifications must be proved and the witness proffered to the court and accepted by it ... as an expert in the relevant field." (footnote omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bauegreen2 sentences2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 2009Hamilton v. City Court, 165 Ariz. 514 , 799 P.2d 855, 858 (1990) (recognizing that the foundation for admitting HGN evidence must "describ[e] the officer's education and experience in administering the test and show[] that proper procedures were followed"); State v. Armstrong, 561 So.2d 883, 887 (La.Ct.App.1990) ("[A] proper foundation for admitting the test has been laid when a showing has been made that the officer who administered the test was trained in the procedure, was certified in its administration and that the procedure was properly administered."); State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 , 607 | 1 | 1 |
State v. O'Keygreen2 sentences1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I 1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 1 | 1 |
Yell v. Statered1 sentence1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen1 sentence1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 1 | 1 |
State v. Barkergreen2 sentences1999Estimates of blood alcohol content based on the HGN test are inadmissible. 366 S.E.2d at 646 (emphasis added). 1999Estimates of blood alcohol content based on the HGN test are inadmissible. 366 S.E.2d at 646 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Murphygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Reedgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Biasgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Commonwealth v. Millergreen | 1 | 1 |
State v. Regangreen1 sentence1995See also State v. Regan, 601 So.2d 5 (La.App. 3d Cir.1992), writ denied, 610 So.2d 815 -16 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Nagelgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Wittegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Klawittergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Malone v. City of Silverhillgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wilson v. Stategreen2 sentences2009But see Wilson v. State, 124 Md.App. 543, 553 , 723 A.2d 494, 498 (1999) (holding that the HGN test may not be used to estimate a specific blood alcohol content). 2009But see Wilson v. State, 124 Md.App. 543, 553 , 723 A.2d 494, 498 (1999) (holding that the HGN test may not be used to estimate a specific blood alcohol content). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Payne & Bond
green
2 sentences2024Blackwell emphasized the scientific nature of the HGN test, 408 Md. at 681 , 971 A.2d at 298 , and Payne focused on the breadth of technical data being tailored down and interpreted into a consumable format based on experience in the field, 440 Md. at 700–01, 104 A.3d at 154 . 2024Blackwell emphasized the scientific nature of the HGN test, 408 Md. at 681 , 971 A.2d at 298 , and Payne focused on the breadth of technical data being tailored down and interpreted into a consumable format based on experience in the field, 440 Md. at 700–01, 104 A.3d at 154 . | 2 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Buening
green
2 sentences1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I 1999See, e.g., Whitson v. State, 314 Ark. 458 , 863 *557 S.W.2d 794, 797-98 (1993) (finding officer’s testimony of HGN result “relevant as some proof of intoxication,” but implying that HGN test may not be used to quantify BAC); State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 , 811 P.2d 488, 491 (1991) (recognizing that “HGN test results may not be used at trial to establish the defendant’s blood alcohol level in the absence of the chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath, or urine”); People v. Buening, 229 Ill.App.3d 538 , 170 Ill.Dec. 542 , 592 N.E.2d 1222, 1227 , appeal denied, 146 Ill.2d 634 , 176 I | 2 | 1995–1999 |
State v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences1999In State v. Superior Court (Blake), 149 Ariz. 269 , 718 P.2d 171 (1986), for example, the Arizona Supreme Court concluded that HGN test results are not admissible as evidence of specific blood alcohol content. 1999In State v. Superior Court (Blake), 149 Ariz. 269 , 718 P.2d 171 (1986), for example, the Arizona Supreme Court concluded that HGN test results are not admissible as evidence of specific blood alcohol content. | 2 | 1995–1999 |
Emerson v. State
green
2 sentences1999In that case, the court took “judicial notice of both the reliability of the theory underlying the HGN test and its technique.” Id. at 769 . 1995The difference between the HGN test and other, more common, field sobriety tests is that certain reactions to alcohol are so common that we take judicial notice of them.” (footnote omitted)); Commonwealth v. Miller, 367 Pa.Super. 359 , 532 A.2d 1186, 1189 (1987) (“Results of the HGN test are ... scientific evidence based on the scientific principle that consumption of alcohol causes the type of nystagmus measured by the HGN test.”); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759 (Tex.Cr.App. en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 323 , 130 L.Ed.2d 284 (1994) (The court held that the HGN test was novel | 2 | 1995–1999 |
United States v. Horn
green
2 sentences2009Horn, 185 F.Supp.2d at 555 ; Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 360 ; Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 180 , 664 A.2d at 77 . [4] In the case at bar, relying on Ragland , the Court of Special Appeals held that "the trial court erred in admitting Trooper Linger's testimony without having him qualified as an expert." The State challenges only the determination of the intermediate appellate court that Linger presented expert testimony; it does not argue that Linger met the qualifications of an expert witness. 2009Horn, 185 F.Supp.2d at 555 ; Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 360 ; Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 180 , 664 A.2d at 77 . [4] In the case at bar, relying on Ragland , the Court of Special Appeals held that "the trial court erred in admitting Trooper Linger's testimony without having him qualified as an expert." The State challenges only the determination of the intermediate appellate court that Linger presented expert testimony; it does not argue that Linger met the qualifications of an expert witness. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Fields v. State
neutral
2 sentences2009The State presents one question for our review: Did the Court of Special Appeals incorrectly apply Ragland v. State, 385 Md. 706 , 870 A.2d 609 (2005) when it concluded that the court erred in allowing the arresting officer to testify as to what he observed when he administered the HGN test to Blackwell and incorrectly fail to consider the "collective effect of other evidence," as this Court did in Fields v. State, 395 Md. 758 , 912 A.2d 637 (2006), when it found that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? 2009The State presents one question for our review: Did the Court of Special Appeals incorrectly apply Ragland v. State, 385 Md. 706 , 870 A.2d 609 (2005) when it concluded that the court erred in allowing the arresting officer to testify as to what he observed when he administered the HGN test to Blackwell and incorrectly fail to consider the "collective effect of other evidence," as this Court did in Fields v. State, 395 Md. 758 , 912 A.2d 637 (2006), when it found that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Ruthardt
green
2 sentences2009Horn, 185 F.Supp.2d at 555 ; Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 360 ; Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 180 , 664 A.2d at 77 . [4] In the case at bar, relying on Ragland , the Court of Special Appeals held that "the trial court erred in admitting Trooper Linger's testimony without having him qualified as an expert." The State challenges only the determination of the intermediate appellate court that Linger presented expert testimony; it does not argue that Linger met the qualifications of an expert witness. 2009Horn, 185 F.Supp.2d at 555 ; Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 360 ; Schultz, 106 Md.App. at 180 , 664 A.2d at 77 . [4] In the case at bar, relying on Ragland , the Court of Special Appeals held that "the trial court erred in admitting Trooper Linger's testimony without having him qualified as an expert." The State challenges only the determination of the intermediate appellate court that Linger presented expert testimony; it does not argue that Linger met the qualifications of an expert witness. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Helms
green
2 sentences1999Id. 1999Id. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| State v. Clark green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Armstrong green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Pennsylvania v. Muniz green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
People v. Hood
green
2 sentences1995The appellate court for the Fourth District of Illinois, in People v. Hood, 265 Ill.App.3d 232 , 202 Ill.Dec. 618 , 638 N.E.2d 264 (4 Dist.1994), adopted the Buening holding in applying that state’s implied consent statute and took judicial notice of the reliability of the HGN test, primarily basing its holding on Buening : As the fifth district determined the HGN test was sufficiently reliable to met the Frye standard ... in criminal proceedings, we are persuaded it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted in implied-consent proceedings; thus, where evidence involving the HGN test is sought to 1995The appellate court for the Fourth District of Illinois, in People v. Hood, 265 Ill.App.3d 232 , 202 Ill.Dec. 618 , 638 N.E.2d 264 (4 Dist.1994), adopted the Buening holding in applying that state’s implied consent statute and took judicial notice of the reliability of the HGN test, primarily basing its holding on Buening : As the fifth district determined the HGN test was sufficiently reliable to met the Frye standard ... in criminal proceedings, we are persuaded it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted in implied-consent proceedings; thus, where evidence involving the HGN test is sought to | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Crampton green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Mark Downs, Inc. v. McCormick Properties, Inc. green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Sharp v. Sharp
green
2 sentences1995In Sharp v. Sharp, 58 Md.App. 386, 396 , 473 A.2d 499 (1984), we noted: “Judicial notice of a fact is an acceptable substitute for formal proof of such fact, when formal proof is clearly unnecessary to enhance the accuracy of the fact-finding process.” See also Mark Downs, Inc. v. McCormick Prop., 51 Md.App. 171, 187 , 441 A.2d 1119 (1982) (assuming it proper to take judicial notice that tropical storm “David” was an “Act of God.”) Maryland Rule 5-201 continues the long-standing practice of allowing an appellate court to take judicial notice of adjudicative facts that are “capable of accurate 1995In Sharp v. Sharp, 58 Md.App. 386, 396 , 473 A.2d 499 (1984), we noted: “Judicial notice of a fact is an acceptable substitute for formal proof of such fact, when formal proof is clearly unnecessary to enhance the accuracy of the fact-finding process.” See also Mark Downs, Inc. v. McCormick Prop., 51 Md.App. 171, 187 , 441 A.2d 1119 (1982) (assuming it proper to take judicial notice that tropical storm “David” was an “Act of God.”) Maryland Rule 5-201 continues the long-standing practice of allowing an appellate court to take judicial notice of adjudicative facts that are “capable of accurate | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Wheeler green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Breitung green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Borchardt green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Commonwealth v. Apollo green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Foster v. State green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Crampton v. State
green
2 sentences1995The State, however, contends that the HGN test is not scientific evidence at ah, citing Crampton v. State, 71 Md.App. 375 , 525 A.2d 1087 (1987), aff'd, 314 Md. 265 , 550 A.2d 693 (1988). 1995The State, however, contends that the HGN test is not scientific evidence at ah, citing Crampton v. State, 71 Md.App. 375 , 525 A.2d 1087 (1987), aff'd, 314 Md. 265 , 550 A.2d 693 (1988). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Malone v. City of Silverhill green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Reed v. State green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Breitung green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Hurley v. United States green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Mount v. El Dorado County Superior Court green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| People v. Vega green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.