Court of Appeals of Maryland· 10/31/1984

Thomas v. State

Citations

483 A.2d 6
301 Md. 294
1984 Md. LEXIS 369

How courts have described this case

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

stating that “[decisions on the relevance of evidence rest in the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a showing that such discretion was clearly abused.”
assessing future dangerousness in terms of society as a whole and hearing evidence on the general psychological attributes that disposed defendant to being such a future threat
term “fellatio” in first degree sexual offense statute does not require penetration, only “some contact” between mouth and male organ
“Of course, rape shield laws may not be used to exclude probative evidence in violation of a defendant’s constitutional right[ ] of ... due process.” (citation omitted)
“[R]ape shield laws may not be used to exclude probative evidence in violation of a defendant’s constitutional rights of confrontation and due process.”
“Decisions on the relevance of evidence rest in the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a showing that such discretion was clearly abused.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Eldridge

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

67 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.