Skip to main content

Miller v. State

Citations

  • 970 A.2d 332
  • 185 Md. App. 293
  • 2009 Md. App. LEXIS 57

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that the Supreme Court “observed,” as opposed to “held,” that “it may be appropriate to presume that in most cases defense counsel routinely explain the nature of the offense”
  • “An accused can understand the terms of a plea agreement without knowing the nature and elements of the charge to which the plea applies.”
  • \An accused can understand the terms of a plea agreement without knowing the nature and elements of the charge to which the plea applies.\
  • “The appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, which this Court treated as an application for leave to appeal[.]”
  • “The Court said nothing about the presumption language it had used in Henderson (or in Lonberger). That is not surprising, however, because the facts in Bradshaw supported a ‘knowledge of nature and elements of the crime’ finding without applying any such presumption.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Eyler, Wright, Sharer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

36 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.