Skip to main content

Solomon v. State

Citations

  • 646 A.2d 1064
  • 101 Md. App. 331
  • 1994 Md. App. LEXIS 127

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that the procedural issues of joinder and severance are not the same as the evidentiary issue of \other crimes\ evidence and they call for different analyses
  • the doctrine of “mutual admissibility” concerns whether “evidence of each crime would be admissible in a trial for the other”
  • “[Pjrejudice at a joint trial does not consist of damage from evidence that would have been admissible in any event even had the trials of the defendants or charges been severed.”
  • “we have found no Maryland decision where, once the initial hurdle of mutual admissibility has been cleared, a decision by a trial judge to order a trial joinder has ever been held to be an abuse of discretion”
  • “The first groundbreaking step taken by the McKnight decision was to hold that, in a jury trial at least, severance was absolutely mandated, as a matter of law, when the evidence with respect to the separate charges (or, presumably, with respect to separate defendants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Moylan, Fischer, Bell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

24 cases in this archive cite 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.