State v. Beard

How courts have described this case

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

• in three cases, delays of 10, 70, and 113 days past the respective Hicks dates
• new trial date was 70 days after the 180-day deadline, and the Court held that the defendant failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that either the postponement or the extent of the delay constituted an abuse of discretion
• trial dates approximately two months after expiration of Hicks
• unavailability of judge or jury to hear case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Toney
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1989-02-28· cited 20×
• Tunnell v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2020-01-16· cited 10×
• Reimsnider v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1984-11-20· cited 5×
• State v. Fisher
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1999-03-18· cited 3×
• Brown v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1998-12-07· cited 1×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Frazier
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-02-07· cited 159×
• Farinholt v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-03-15· cited 50×
• Calhoun v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-03-15· cited 41×
• Carter v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1983-04-08· cited 5×