Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 10/6/2005

Jackson v. State

Citations

884 A.2d 694
164 Md. App. 679
2005 Md. App. LEXIS 256

How courts have described this case

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

stating that, even where an appellate court might disagree with a ruling, the appellate court “will not presume to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court except in the rare case in which the trial judge has literally abused his discretion”
In analyzing whether newly discovered evidence could have been found using due diligence, “[t]he test, of course, is whether the evidence was, in fact, discoverable and not whether the appellant or appellant’s counsel was at fault in not discovering it.”
a trial judge’s discretion requires his assessing the weight and credibility of the new evidence, as he is “the only judicial figure who had his thumb on the pulse of the trial,” and, therefore, “[his] exercise of discretion in evaluating credibility is indispensable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Salmon, Meredith, Moylan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

38 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.