Skip to main content

Poole v. State

Citations

  • 428 A.2d 434
  • 290 Md. 114
  • 1981 Md. LEXIS 211

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that, even prior to the elimination of the voucher rule, impeachment of one’s witness by a prior inconsistent statement would be permissible where “the calling party [was] surprised” by the witness’s testimony
  • explaining that, even prior to the elimination of the voucher rule, impeachment of one’s witness by a prior inconsistent statement would be permissible where “the calling party [was] surprised” by the witness’s testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Smith, Digges, Eldridge, Cole, Davidson, Rodowsky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.