State v. Rodgers
State v. Rodgers
Opinion
Circuit Court for Baltimore County Case No. C-03-CR-19-000076
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF MARYLAND
No. 67
September Term, 2021
STATE OF MARYLAND
v.
DE’SHON C. RODGERS
Fader, C.J.
Watts
Hotten
Booth
Biran
Gould
Eaves,
JJ.
PER CURIAM ORDER Pursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic.
2022-04-28 09:48-04:00 Filed: April 28, 2022 Suzanne C. Johnson, Clerk STATE OF MARYLAND * IN THE
* COURT OF APPEALS
* OF MARYLAND v.
* COA-REG-0067-2021
* No. 67 DE’SHON C. RODGERS * September Term, 2021
PER CURIAM ORDER
The Court having considered and granted the petition for a writ of certiorari in the above-captioned case, it is this 28th day of April, 2022
ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to that Court to consider whether or not the holding in Lopez-Villa v. State, No. 22 (September Term, 2021) should be applied in this case and, if so, to reconsider its prior opinion concerning whether the trial court erred in not asking requested voir dire question(s); and it is further
ORDERED, that the case is remanded to the Court of Special Appeals for consideration and resolution of the remaining two issues raised on brief by Respondent, De’Shon C. Rodgers, before that Court, namely:
Did the trial court err by permitting Officer Brian H. Carver to offer expert
testimony about Rodgers’ actions in an aerial video without being qualified
as an expert witness?
Did the trial court err by preventing defense counsel from cross-examining
Officer Alexander A. Pearson about his failure to comply with department
policy that required him to file a complaint against Officer First Class Thorne
A. Allen for use of excessive force? and it is further
ORDERED, that costs are to be paid by Respondent.
/s/ Matthew J. Fader
Chief Judge
Reference
- Status
- Published