Skip to main content

Vandegrift v. State

Citations

  • 206 A.2d 250
  • 237 Md. 305
  • 1965 Md. LEXIS 722

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to call to the stand several alleged accomplices of the defendant, knowing that they would invoke the privilege
  • stating that \[t]he test is whether the State's Attorney calls the witness for the effect of the claim of privilege on the jury\
  • stating that “[t]he test is whether the State’s Attorney calls the witness for the effect of the claim of privilege on the jury”
  • describing the requirements for prejudicial error when a State witness invokes the right to remain silent
  • describing the requirements for prejudicial error when a State witness invokes the right to remain silent
  • granting new trial when trial court's questioning of a witness manifested its disbelief of that witness's testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Prescott, Horney, Marbury, Sybert, Oppenheimer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Vandegrift v. State

2 other CourtListener records share this case 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.