On October 18, 2013, Reginald Hopson, the appellant, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, of (1) first-degree assault, (2) second-degree assault, (3) two counts of reckless endangerment, (4) use of a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence, (5) transporting a handgun in a vehicle, and (6) possession of a regulated firearm after being convicted of a crime of violence. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of ten years incarceration, the first five of which were to be served without the possibility of parole, and the latter five of which were suspended, and three years of probation upon release. This appeal concerns appellant's post-arrest silence. On cross-examination, Hopson testified that taking the stand was the first chance that he had to tell his side of the story, other than to his attorney. The principal issue presented is whether by making that assertion, Hopson opened the door for an impeachment that revealed his post-arrest silence. With issues raised by the State, this appeal presents three questions for our review. 1. Is Hopson's challenge preserved for review? 2. "Did the trial court err by allowing the State to question Mr. Hopson about his post-arrest silence?" 3. Is the trial court error, if any, harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? We answer the first issue partially in the negative and partially in the affirmative. We answer the second issue in the negative. Consequently, we need not consider the third issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *