Skip to main content

Norton v. State

Citations

  • 217 Md. App. 388
  • 94 A.3d 110
  • 2014 WL 2873957
  • 2014 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.

  • After denial of motion in limine to exclude evidence, requiring a defendant to “make ‘yet another objection only a short time after the court’s ruling to admit the evidence would be to exalt form over substance.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hotten, Berger, Arthur

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 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.