Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

BRYANT McARTHUR v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Did the circuit court err or abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s petition for writ of actual innocence?

For the reasons discussed below, we shall affirm the circuit court’s ruling on two grounds. The court did not abuse its discretion in finding that McArthur had failed to act with due diligence to discover the alleged newly discovered evidence within one year after the imposition of his sentence. See Code (2008 Repl. Vol., 2014 Supp.), § 8-301(a)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Article (“CP”); Md. Rule 4-331(c)(1). Second, the court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that McArthur failed to demonstrate, as required by statute, that the alleged newly-discovered evidence created a “substantial or significant possibility that the result [of the trial] may have been different.” CP § 8-301(a)(1).

Read the unreported opinion.