Skip to main content

Pete v. State

Citations

  • 862 A.2d 419
  • 384 Md. 47
  • 2004 Md. LEXIS 779
  • 2004 WL 2775916

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that when construing multiple statutes, we must presume that \the General Assembly acted with full knowledge of prior legislation and intended statutes affecting the same subject matter `to blend into a consistent and harmonious body of law.'\
  • holding that when construing multiple statutes, we must presume that “the General Assembly acted with full knowledge of prior legislation and intended statutes affecting the same subject matter ‘to blend into a consistent and harmonious body of law.’ ”
  • stating that “various consistent and related enactments, although made at different times and without reference to one another, nevertheless should be harmonized as much as possible” (citations omitted)
  • holding the cruiser was not damaged as a direct result of the assault
  • resolving a conflict between an apparent typographical error in transcribing the oral opinion of the sentencing judge in ordering probation by examining the plain language in the probation order
  • explaining that “restitution may be ordered, with qualifications, as a direct sentence for a crime or delinquent act” under CP § ll-603(a), but that sentencing courts also employ their broad power under CP § 6-221 to impose restitution as a condition of probation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harrell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.