Preview:

HEADNOTE: RICHARD WAYNE SIMONS V. STATE OF MARYLAND, NO. 853, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2003 MARYLAND RULE 4-263(a)(2)(C); PRETRIAL DISCOVERY OF DEFENDANT BY A WITNESS FOR THE STATE; WILLIAMS V. STATE, 364 MD. 160 (2001); UNDER THE RATIONALE AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS ESPOUSED IN WILLIAMS, TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DETERMINATION THAT TESTIMONY OF WITNESS THAT SHE SAW APPELLANT AND ACCOMPLICE LOITERING AROUND VICTIM'S APARTMENT AT THE TIME OF THE BREAK-IN DID NOT CONSTITUTE AN IDENTIFICATION REQUIRING DISCOVERY IN CONTEMPLATION OF MD. RULE 4-263(a)(2)(C), WHICH IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO BOTH PARTIES, TO FACILITATE INFORMED PLEAS, ENSURE THOROUGH AND EFFECTIVE CROSS EXAMINATION AND EXPEDITE TRIAL PROCESS BY DIMINISHING NEED FOR CONTINUANCES TO DEAL WITH UNFAMILIAR INFORMATION PRESENTED AT TRIAL; SUCH POLICY CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRE A MORE EXPANSIVE DEFINITION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES AN "IDENTIFICATION" THAN THE CONCEPT OF "IDENTIFICATION" IN THE CONTEXT OF CHALLENGE ON THE BASIS OF ASSERTED MISIDENTIFICATION OF A WITNESS.

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 853 September Term, 2003

RICHARD WAYNE SIMONS v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Davis, Eyler, James R., Rodowsky, Lawrence F. (retired, specially assigned), JJ.

Opinion by Davis, J.

Filed: October 29, 2004

On April 2, 2002, appellant was charged in the Harford County Circuit Court with first degree burglary, two counts of felony theft, malicious destruction of property valued at $500 or more, malicious destruction of property valued at less than $500, and unlawful taking of a motor vehicle. The State subsequently

withdrew the charge of malicious destruction of property valued at less than $500 and trial commenced on March 11, 2003. During

trial, appellant argued a motion in limine to disallow a witness's testimony regarding her pre

Download Simons v. State.pdf

Maryland Law