Court of Appeals of Maryland· 3/15/1994

State v. Bell

Citations

638 A.2d 107
334 Md. 178
1994 Md. LEXIS 40

How courts have described this case

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

holding that “[t]he State may not lead the defendant and the trial court down a primrose path, only to leave them stranded when, on appeal, the State deems it advantageous to change its strategy”
holding that the Court of Special Appeals did not err when it declined to address question raised by State for first time on appeal of whether probable cause existed for second warrantless search
noting that use of the word \ordinarily\ contemplates circumstances where appellate review of issues not previously raised is appropriate
noting that use of the word “ordinarily” contemplates circumstances where appellate review of issues not previously raised is appropriate
noting that warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable and that \the burden of proving the applicability of an exception to the warrant requirement rests on the State\
noting that warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable and that “the burden of proving the applicability of an exception to the warrant requirement rests on the State”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Karwacki

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Bell

643 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.