Jones v. State
Cases that cite this one
26 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Robinson v. State (Md. 1999)
- Evans v. State (Md. 1994)
- Small v. State (Md. 2019)
- State v. Adams (Md. 2008)
- Spain v. State (Md. 2005)
- Borchardt v. State (Md. 2001)
- Oken v. State (Md. 1992)
- Small v. State (Md. 2019)
- Smiley v. State (Md. 2015)
- Unger v. State (Md. 2012)
- Yates v. State (Md. 2012)
- Montgomery County Maryland v. Shropshire (Md. 2011)
- Daniel v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2000)
- Degren v. State (Md. 1999)
- Conyers v. State (Md. 1997)
- McDuffie v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1997)
- Hardison v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1997)
- Robinson v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1997)
- Grandison v. State (Md. 1995)
- Butler v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1995)
- Howell v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1991)
- Collins v. State (Md. 1990)
- Hunt v. State (Md. 1990)
- Oladipupo v. Warden (District Court, D. Maryland 2022)
- Massey v. State (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2007)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
In Jones v. State, 310 Md. 569, 530 A.2d 743 (1987), this Court affirmed appellant’s convictions and sentences for two first degree murders and other offenses. In particular, we upheld the death penalty imposed by a jury for the two first degree murders. Subsequently, the Supreme Court of the United States vacated this Court’s judgment and remanded the case to this Court for further consideration in light of Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1860, *112 100 L.Ed.2d 384 (1988). See Jones v. Maryland, 486 U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 2815, 100 L.Ed.2d 916 (1988).
After additional briefing and argument, and consideration of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Mills v. Maryland, supra, we conclude that a new capital sentencing hearing must be ordered in this case. Recently, in State v. Colvin, 314 Md. 1, 5, 548 A.2d 506 (1988), we held that “[a] new sentencing hearing is required ... because the procedure employed at Colvin-El’s sentencing by a jury is indistinguishable from the procedure invalidated in Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1860, 100 L.Ed.2d 384 (1988).” In substance, the same is true here.
JUDGMENTS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE COUNTY AFFIRMED EXCEPT AS TO DEATH SENTENCE. DEATH SENTENCE VACATED. CASE REMANDED FOR A NEW SENTENCING PROCEEDING UNDER § 413 OF ARTICLE 27. COSTS TO BE PAID BY BALTIMORE COUNTY.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.