Court of Appeals of Maryland· 12/22/1980

Stokes v. State

Citations

423 A.2d 552
289 Md. 155

How courts have described this case

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

holding that inevitable discovery was unavailable to State where there was no testimony as to usual police procedure and therefore no way to know whether police “would have, in fact” discovered the evidence absent the unlawful action
holding inadmissible inculpatory statements resulting from a promise made by police that defendant's wife would not be arrested if defendant produced drug evidence, and rejecting the State's argument that benefit to a family member was not the type of advantage contemplated in Hillard
evidence excluded under this standard when police, after lawful arrest, relied on unlawfully elicited statement by defendant that his heroin was hidden in “drop ceiling”
statement by interrogating officer that he would not arrest the suspect's wife was an improper promise
“[Tlhere must also be sufficient evidence that the confession was actually induced by a threat or promise!.]” (citation and emphasis omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by 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.