68 Md. App. 78 - Moreland v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[bjecause the facts relating to the waiver issue are ambiguous, they do not provide a sufficient basis to justify the trial court’s determination of waiver. The ambiguity exists because no evidence was presented to show either the date that appellant spoke with the public defender or whether in fact he ever requested public defender assistance. This ambiguity must be resolved before the determination of waiver may be made. If the facts "show that appellant was at fault for not securing public defender assistance, the trial court would be justified in determining that appellant lacked a meritorious reason for not having counsel and consequently could find waiver by virtue of Md.Rule 4-215(c). On the other hand, if appellant made a timely request, but was refused assistance, such refusal could amount to a meritorious reason for not having counsel. In such event, the waiver provisions of Md.Rule 4-215(c) would be inapplicable. Furthermore, if the facts show that appellant was refused public defender assistance because he was deemed financially unqualified, the trial court would have to conduct a further inquiry to decide whether appellant was entitled to court-appointed counsel,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. State · 81 Md. App. 653 - Gantt v. State

2. “If the defendant satisfactorily explains the absence of a private attorney based on his inability to afford one, the court must attempt to determine why he is not represented by the public defender. In order for a defendant to show that he has a meritorious reason for not being represented by the public defender, he must, at a minimum, show that he made a timely request and that he was refused representation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 81 Md. App. 653 - Gantt v. State

3. “First: Present to the defendant an explanation of the matters set forth in Rule 4-215(a); Second: Afford the defendant an opportunity to secure counsel; and Third: If the defendant does not retain counsel, conduct an on the record inquiry to determine whether the defendant has a meritorious reason for not having. counsel.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 73 Md. App. 663 - Jones v. Johnson