•  
  •  
 

University of Baltimore Law Forum

Authors

Nadya Cheatham

Abstract

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a note from a jury, containing allegations that a juror would change her original voting position if it meant she could go home earlier, did not raise a presumption of prejudice and therefore did not require the trial judge to conduct voir dire sua sponte. Nash v. State, 439 Md. 53, 94 A.3d 23 (2014). Additionally, the court held that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion when she chose to release the jurors and remind them of their duties under oath, rather than directly assuring the impartiality of the jurors. Id. The court further held that there was no abuse of discretion in the trial courtn when she chose to release thAllen instruction. Id. Furthermore, the court held that the trial judgediscretion in the trial courtn when she choiolate Maryland Rule 4-326(d).

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.