LOVE v. STATE

No. 919, September Term, 1992.

95 Md. App. 420 (1993)

621 A.2d 910

DANIEL HARLIN LOVE v. STATE OF MARYLAND.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland.

Reconsideration Denied April 27, 1993.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jason A. Shapiro (Howard E. Goldman, P.A., on the brief), Laurel, for appellant.

Thomas K. Clancy, Asst. Atty. Gen. (J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen., Baltimore, and Alexander Williams, Jr., State's Atty. for Prince George's County, Upper Marlboro, on the brief), for appellee.

Argued before WILNER, C.J., MOYLAN, J., and JAMES S. GETTY, Judge (retired), Specially Assigned.


MOYLAN, Judge.

Every conceivable wrong occurring in the course of a criminal trial does not necessarily give rise to a corresponding remedy. A fortiori, it does not always trigger the particular remedy invoked by the defendant who has arguably suffered the wrong. The Motion for New Trial is one of the post-trial remedies. It is by no means, however, a never-failing panacea, available whenever and however outraged justice may beckon. It is designed to correct...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases