Maryland Lawyers Harford Criminal Abuse Possession Drugs Intent Distribute
Hilton v. State
The Harford Circuit court granted certiorari to defendant’s appeal of an affirmance, by the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, of his convictions of possession of drugs with intent to distribute and maintenance of a nuisance, to consider whether the trial court had erred in allowing the admission in evidence of a medical bill bearing defendant’s name and the address of the premises where the drugs were found.
If you are facing a criminal case in Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
The Maryland Court made the following holding:
- The Court of Appeals of Maryland reviews rulings on the admissibility of evidence ordinarily on an abuse of discretion standard. Review of the admissibility of evidence which is hearsay is different. Hearsay, under the Maryland Rules, must be excluded as evidence at trial, unless it falls within an exception to the hearsay rule excluding such evidence or is permitted by applicable constitutional provisions or statutes. Md. R. 5-802. Thus, a circuit court has no discretion to admit hearsay in the absence of a provision providing for its admissibility. Whether evidence is hearsay is an issue of law reviewed de novo.
- In Maryland, to establish the guilt of a defendant charged with possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant exercised actual or constructive dominion or control over the drugs.
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland. We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.