In 2001, Melvin Thomas, appellant, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City of attempted first-degree murder and related offenses and sentenced to sixty-five years’ imprisonment. On appeal he asks: Did the trial court err in denying appellant’s motion for a new trial?
Though appellant presented seven bases for a new trial, on appeal, he focuses on only one issue, and we shall confine our analysis to that issue. Appellant asserts that his right to a fair trial was compromised because he was unable to present impeachment evidence regarding the victim’s drug dealing referenced in Donte Lyle’s and Dewey Morgan’s pre-trial statements. The State contends that appellant’s claim was rejected on two separate occasions by the circuit court, and we should also reject it. The State also argues that appellant’s argument is beyond the scope of relief ordered by the post-conviction court, and we should not consider it. We will begin our analysis with the latter issue.