Quantcast

Tag Archives: Kenney

EMILIO ROBERTO FERNANDEZ v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Given that appellant’s motion for modification of sentence was filed nine years after sentencing—well more than the 90 days after sentencing within which a motion for modification must be filed—the State avers that the trial court correctly ruled that it had no authority to modify appellant’s sentence.

Read More »

EARNEST SAHADY v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

Montgomery County property owner argued 1) that Planning Board erred in concluding he had actual and constructive notice of the Forest Conservation Easement and 2) that the Board lacks authority to administratively enforce the FCE through civil penalties and corrective measures.

Read More »

IN RE: ROBERT M.

The court did not leave its role as an impartial arbiter by asking counsel what he intended to ask the witness if he returned to the stand after cross-examination and re-cross, then denying the recall upon hearing the proffer; the court was merely controlling the conduct of the hearing.

Read More »

RODNEY GREEN v. JOHN WOLFE, WARDEN

To the extent appellant is arguing that the sentences to be served are a combination of consecutive and concurrent sentences rather than simply a series of consecutive sentences, any ambiguity appears (but we do not decide) to have been resolved in appellant’s favor, but if not, the issue should first be addressed in the circuit court and we shall vacate the judgment and remand for that express purpose.

Read More »

PHOENIX EAGLE CORPORATION v. HERBERT BURGUNDER, III, SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE

Did the lower court err in denying (1) stay of foreclosure sale where appellant tendered payment of debt prior to sale; (2) stay of sale of three properties as an entirety where Forbearance Agreement required they be sold separately?

Read More »

Langley Eugene Willis v. State of Maryland

1. Must the convictions in this case be reversed because the trial court failed to “determine[] and announce[] on the record” that appellant’s waiver of his right to a jury trial was made knowingly and voluntarily, as required by Maryland Rule 4-246 (b)? 2. Is the evidence sufficient to sustain appellant’s convictions for resisting arrest, second degree escape, and possession of equipment used to produce controlled dangerous substances?

Read More »