Skip to main content

Williams v. State

Citations

  • 435 Md. 474
  • 79 A.3d 931
  • 2013 WL 6152160
  • 2013 Md. LEXIS 831

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that defendant's letter to trial court, written in the present tense, was sufficient to trigger inquiry
  • holding that the Maryland resisting arrest statute retains the offense’s common law elements
  • holding that the Maryland resisting arrest statute retains the offense’s common law elements
  • noting that “the onus [is] on the [circuit [c]ourt to ‘permit the defendant to explain the reasons for the request.’ ”
  • “(1) [T]he defendant was arrested; (2) the arrest was lawful; and (3) the defendant refused to submit to the arrest.”
  • “(1) [T]he defendant was arrested; (2) the arrest was lawful; and (3) the defendant refused to submit to the arrest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harrell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

26 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.