Quantcast

Tag Archives: Search and seizure

Rulings on science, fiduciary duty, marijuana top Md. high court’s term

The Court of Appeals builiding in Annapolis. MF-D 9/20/04.

Maryland’s top court ended its 2019-2020 session last week having issued landmark rulings permitting the admission of evidence based on emerging sciences, creating a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty and ruling that police may not arrest and ...

Read More »

Odor-based pot arrests are unconstitutional: Md. high court

“(P)olice officers must have probable cause to believe a person possesses a criminal amount of marijuana in order to arrest that person and conduct a search incident thereto,” Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbera wrote for the high court. (iStock photo)

Police officers lack probable cause to arrest and search someone for marijuana possession simply for smelling of the drug, because possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana is not a crime in Maryland, the state’s top court unanimously ruled ...

Read More »

Md. high court upholds search of man who ran from police

The Courts of Appeals building in Annapolis. (The Daily Record File)

In a decision addressing when police can constitutionally give chase, Maryland’s top court held Tuesday that officers were justified in seizing a person who ran from them while they were investigating who among a group drinking alcohol had thrown a ...

Read More »

Bill seeks to close search ‘loopholes’ for police

ANNAPOLIS – Prosecutors heavily criticized Thursday a bill they said would “attempt to change hundreds of years of Supreme Court case law” but advocates said ensures police would not be rewarded for conducting searches without probable cause. Del. Curt Anderson, ...

Read More »

JAMONTE FLETCHER v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Appellant argues that a reasonable person would not feel free to leave when the officers approached him and activated their emergency lights on their patrol cars. The officer’s show of authority did not ripen into a seizure because the officers had not restrained appellant physically nor had appellant submitted to the officers’ show of authority.

Read More »