Courts of Maryland

I: Case The Court of Appeals of Maryland Number 69 September Term, 2012. Glenn Joseph Raynor v. State of Maryland. Case number 12-K-08-001527. Argued: April 8, 2014. Decided: August 27, 2014 II. Case Summary This appeal evolved out of a 2006 rape case that occurred in Harford county Maryland. More than two years after the incident the victim identified Glenn Joseph Raynor, hereby known as petitioner, as a possible suspect. After departing a voluntary police interview in which petitioner ultimately

The Maryland drug court has failed yet another person and he is now headed to prison. This person is the love of my life and my three month old son 's father. It all started last Christmas. The day after Christmas his missed a urine test and was sent to jail for three weeks after informing his parole officer he was out of town. They told him “You are better off failing a urine test than to miss a test.” even though he submitted a test the very next day. He was the sole provider at the time because

Supreme Court sought to clarify the powers ascribed to prosecutors in three cases. These cases included: Brady v. Maryland 373 U.S. 83, Giglio v. United States 405 U.S. 150, and the United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97. Although the issue explored by the Supreme Court differed in each of these cases, the verdict in each case helped to clarify whether or not prosecutors in the United States had the right to suppress evidence. Brady v. Maryland In Brady v. Maryland, the United States Supreme Court examined

underlying litigation, all indicate that this Court should deny 50NL’s motion to compel. Unfortunately, while Md. Rule

Maryland Department of the Environment v. Anacostia Riverkeeper Kelsey McRoberts Slippery Rock University INTRODUCTION In 2013, Anacostia Riverkeeper, an organization devoted to restoring the Anacostia River, challenged a permit issued in 2010 by the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE). The MDE issued a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) permit to Montgomery County, Maryland (Edwards, 2015). MS4 systems fall under the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National

As an important landmark case in Congress and the Supreme Court History, McCulloch V. Maryland. Which set the guidelines for how much power congress really had as well as how much power the constitution had over state laws. It put attention the issue of a state taxing a federal bank in 1816. Maryland imposed a law that called for the taxation of banks in the state that was not chartered by state legislature during the depression of 1818. The second bank of the United States had refused to pay the

Introduction: The case McCulloch v. Maryland was one that began in the state of Maryland, and eventually was decided upon at the national level, via the Supreme Court, in 1819. It would assert national supremacy over that of state action in areas where the constitution granted forms of authority. The issue was brought to hand when the state of Maryland placed a tax on bank notes of the Second Bank of the United States. National banks were instituted in every state throughout the country. The

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) 1. The McCulloch v. Maryland case was brought to the Supreme Court in 1819. Maryland sued James McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States, for failing to pay the taxes due under the Maryland statute imposing a tax on all banks operating in Maryland. McCulloch testified that the Maryland statute was constitutionally incorrect. 2. The case created two principles in Constitutional law. First, Congress is allowed to implement the Constitution’s

Chief Justice wrote his opinion to the court stated that the constitution gave congress all the power to make all the laws. In Marbury v. Madison in 1803, Marshall overturned an act of congress for the first time that conflicted with the constitution. It was a daring step for a politically vulnerable court and Marshall crafted the opinion in such a way that Thomas Jefferson could not reject it. John Marshall had strong views that made him dominate the court from 1801 to 1835 and personally responsible

Rebecca Sperberg 3AB Current Event #4 The state of Maryland has been battling unconstitutional gerrymandering for years now. According to Washington Post writer Robert Barnes, recently the Supreme Court granted Steve Shapiro a Maryland man continuance in the lawsuit regarding the state’s congressional redistricting being unconstitutionally gerrymandered. Lower courts were proved wrong by the Supreme Court for attempting to dismiss the lawsuit. Maryland democrats adjusted district lines in favor of their