Skip to main content

Edmonds v. State

Citations

  • 812 A.2d 1034
  • 372 Md. 314
  • 2002 Md. LEXIS 956

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the trial judge acted improperly by not making a clear finding of pretext under step three
  • noting that it was unclear whether the judge found the explanation credible as he first stated he did not buy the explanation, but later stated the explanation could be legitimate
  • noting that it was unclear whether the judge found the explanation credible as he first stated he did not buy the explanation, but later stated the explanation could be legitimate
  • ordering a remand because under two years had lapsed after the original trial concluded
  • challenge pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986)
  • “Sometimes the record is adequate for a reviewing court to find that the trial judge implicitly ruled on” a predicate fact

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Raker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

60 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.