Duncan v. Klein

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “a grant of a new trial effectively wipes out the prior proceedings” (citation modified)
• concluding that the grant of a new trial “effectively wipe[d] out the prior proceedings” and required the defendant to allege at his second trial that the Maryland gang statute was unconstitutional even though he had raised that same issue prior to his first trial
• concluding that the grant of a new trial “effectively wipe[d] out the prior proceedings” and required the defendant to allege at his second trial that the Maryland gang statute was unconstitutional even though he had raised that same issue prior to his first trial
• concluding that the grant of a new trial “effectively wipe[d] out the prior proceedings” and required the defendant to allege at his second trial that the Maryland gang statute was unconstitutional even though he had raised that same issue prior to his first trial
• concluding that the grant of a new trial “effectively wipe[d] out the prior proceedings” and required the defendant to allege at his second trial that the Maryland gang statute was unconstitutional even though he had raised that same issue prior to his first trial
• defendant’s omnibus motion pursuant to Rule 4-252 “failed to comply with the requirements of Md. Rule 4-252(e)” in asserting a challenge to constitutionality of gang participation charge on retrial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).