Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

DAVID R. FAULKNER v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Criminal procedure — Writ of actual innocence — Abuse of discretion

This is the fourth time this Court has considered challenges to appellant’s convictions relating to the murder of 64-year-old Adeline Wilford, who was stabbed to death in the kitchen of her farmhouse on January 5, 1987.1 In this appeal, David R. Faulkner, appellant, challenges the ruling of the Circuit Court for Talbot County denying his Petition for a Writ of Innocence. In appellant’s prior appeal, this Court vacated the circuit court’s initial denial of his Petition for a Writ of Innocence. Faulkner v. State, No. 1066 & 1878, Sept. Term, 2016, slip op. at 20 (filed July 26, 2017). We held that the circuit court erred in finding that certain evidence, discussed infra, did not qualify as newly discovered evidence. Id. at 17. We remanded for further proceedings, i.e., to determine if the newly discovered evidence created “a substantial or significant possibility that the result of the trial would have been different.” Id. 2 On remand, the circuit court held an evidentiary hearing and again denied appellant’s Petition for a Writ of Innocence. On appeal, appellant raises the following question for this Court’s review: 1. Did the circuit court abuse its discretion in failing to analyze the BollingerHaddaway tapes under the correct legal standard? 2. Did the circuit court abuse its discretion in failing to analyze the Ty Brooks evidence under the correct legal standard? 3. Did the circuit court improperly redact “Ty Brooks” from the confession of William Thomas implicating both in the Wilford murder? For the reasons set forth below, we shall …

Read the opinion.