2002_WL_32510996.pdf (PDFy mirror)

2 MB·

IN THE
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND
SEPTEMBER TERM, 2000
NO. 923
APR 3 0 200Z
ADNAN SYED,
Appellant
V°
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
FOR BALTIMORE CITY
(Wanda Keyes Heard, Judge)
BRIEF OF APPELLEE
J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR.
Attorney General of Maryland
STEVEN L. HOLCOMB
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Criminal Appeals Division
200 Saint Paul Place
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
[phone]
Counsel for Appellee
TABLE OF CONTENTS
P_
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................. 1
QUESTIONS PRESENTED .................................... 1
STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................... 2
ARGUMENT:
THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF BRADY V.
MARYLAND WHERE SYED WAS ABLE TO
CROSS-EXAMINE STATE'S WITNESS, JAY
WILDS, ABOUT ALL RELEVANT ASPECTS
OF HIS PLEA AGREEMENT AND THE
MANNER IN WHICH HE OBTAINED THE
ASSISTANCE OF PRIVATE COUNSEL ............. 15
A. General Principles ........................... 16
g. There was no Brady violation
where Syed effectively impeached
Jay Wilds and elicited all relevant
information about Wilds's plea
agreement during five days of
cross-examination ........................... 19
C. The trial court properly exercised
discretion in ruling that Syed could
not call the prosecutor to testify
regarding the same matters testi fled
to by Jay Wilds ............................. 33
D, If preserved, the trial court properly
denied Syed's motion to strike the
testimony of Jay Wilds ....................... 37
Eo The trial court properly exercised
discretion in denying Syed's
motion to compel ........................... 39
F° The trial court properly exercised
discretion in denying Syed's
request to recall Wilds after five
days of cross-examination, and in
denying Syed's request to call
Wild's attorney as a witness ................... 42
Go The trial court properly denied
Syed's request to call Elizabeth
Julian as a witness to testify to the
process by which a charged
defendant applies for representation
from the Public Defender ..................... 48
H° There was no prosecutorial
misconduct in Syed's trial and Syed
was not prejudiced by any belated
disclosures of information
concerning State's witness, Jay
Wilds ..................................... 52
II. THE TRIAL COURT PROPERLY EXERCISED
DISCRETION IN PERMITTING A WITNESS
TO READ A PORTION OF A LETTER
WRITTEN BY THE VICTIM AND
ADDRESSED TO SYED .......................... 53
III. IF PRESERVED, THE TRIAL COURT
PROPERLY EXERCISED DISCRETION IN
ADMITTING THE VICTIM'S DIARY INTO
EVIDENCE ..................................... 60
ii
t CONCLUSION ............................................. 66
PERTINENT PROVISIONS ................................... 67
TABLE OF CITATIONS
Cases
Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250 (1988) ........... 52
Banks v. State, 92 Md. App. 422 (1992) ....................... 63, 64
Best v. State, 79 Md. App. 241, cert. denied, 317 Md. 70 (1989) ...... 59
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) ................... 15, passim
Brown v. State, 359 Md. 180 (2000) ............................. 56
Carlton v. State, 111 Md. App. 436, cert. denied, 344 Md. 328 (1996) .. 58
Case v. State, 118 Md. App. 279 (1997) .......................... 58
Caviness v. State, 244 Md. 575 (1966.) ........................... 60
Coto'ers v. State, 354 Md. 132 (1999) ..................... 55, passim
Convers v. State, 367 Md. 571 (2002) ......................... 16, 19
Cook v. State, 118 Md. App. 404 (1997), cert. denied,
349 Md. 234 (1998) ......................................... 65
Cutchin v. State, __ Md. App. __, No. 195, Sept. Term, 2001
(filed March 1, 2002) ........................................ 30
Davis v. Stale, 189 Md. 269 (1947) .............................. 60
iii
Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 (1976) ............................. 59
Ebb v. State, 34I Md. 578, cert. denied, 519 U.S. 832 (1996) ......... 29
Evans v. State, 304 Md. 487 (1985), cert. denied,
478 U.S. 1010 (1986) ........................................ 39
Farah v. Stout, 112 Md. App. 106 (1996), cert. denied,
344 Md. 567 (1997) ......................................... 58
Gaylord v. State, 2 Md. App. 571 (1967) ......................... 61
Grandison v. State, 305 Md. 685, cert .denied, 479 U.S. 873 (1986) .... 38
Grant v. State, 76 Md. App. 165 (1988), rev'd on other grounds,
318 Md. 672 (1990) ...................................... 61, 63
Gray v. State, 137 Md. App. 460 (2001), rev'd on other grounds,
__ Md. __, No. 37, Sept. Term, 2001 (filed April 11, 2002) ...... 57, 58
Green v. State, 127 Md. App. 758 (1999) ......................... 29
Grier v. State, 351 Md. 241 (1998) .............................. 54
Holland v. State, 122 Md. App. 532, cert. denied, 351 Md. 662 (1998) .. 56
Holloway v. State, 26 Md. App. 382, cert. denied,
276 Md. 745 (1975) ...................................... 61, 63
Holt v. State, 50 Md. App. 578 (1982) ............................ 36
Hunt v. State, 321 Md. 387 (1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 835 (1991) ... 63
Johnson v. State, 332 Md. 456 (1993) ..................... 57, passim
Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250 (2000) ............................ 38
iv
Jones v. State, 132 Md, App. 657 (2000) .......................... 18
Jones v. State, 182 Md. 653 (1944) .............................. 57
Kirkland v. State, 75 Md. App. 49 (1988) ......................... 58
Klauenberg v. State, 355 Md. 528 (1999) ......................... 62
Leuschner v. State, 41 Md. App. 423 (1979) ....................... 60
Lyba v. State, 321 Md. 564 (1991) ............................... 29
Mack v. State, 300 Md. 583 (1984) .............................. 29
Marshall v. State, 346 Md. 186 (1997) ........................ 30, 31
McCray v. State, 305 Md. 126 (1985) ............................ 58
McKenzie v. State, 236 Md. 597 (1964) ........................... 40
Mzttual Life hTsuranee Co. v. Hilhnon, 145 U.S. 285 (1892) .......... 57
Oken v. State, 327 Md. 628 (1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 931 (1993) .. 47
Oken v. State, 327 Md. 628 (1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 931 (1993) .. 57
Richmond v. State, 330 Md. 223 (1993) .......................... 65
Robinson v. State, 66 Md. App. 246 (1986.) ........................ 57
Rosenberg v. State, 129 Md. App. 221, cert. denied,
358 Md. 382 (1999) ......................................... 38
Simpson v. State, 121 Md. App. 263 (1998) ....................... 47
&Tzallu.'ood v. State, 320 Md. 300 (1990) ....................... 29, 30
V
Pa_w
Snyder v. State, 361 Md. 580 (2000) .......................... 56, 59
State v. Cox, 298 Md. 173 (1983) ............................... 30
State v. Daughton, 321 Md. 206 (1990) ........................... 65
State v. Deleon, __ Md. App. __, No. 866, Sept. Term, 2001
(filed April 3, 2002) ......................................... 52
State v. Hutchinson, 287 Md. 198 (1980) ......................... 65
State v. Jones, 138 Md. App. 178 (2001), cert. granted,
365 Md. 266 (2001)(argued December 3, 2001) ................... 54
State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 (1992) ............................ 16
Stevenson v. State, 299 Md. 297 (1984) ........................... 17
Stewart v. State, 104 Md. App. 273 (1995) ........................ 19
Stouffer v. State, 118 Md. App. 590 (1997), aff'd in part, rev "dh_part,
on other grounds, 352 Md. 97 (1998) ........................... 29
Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (t999) ...................... 16, 17
Thomas v. State, Md. App. __, No. 255, Sept. Term, 2001
(filed March 1, 2002) ........................................ 47
Tipton v. State, 39 Md. App. 578 (1978) .......................... 37
Tuer v. McDonald, 112 Md. App. 121 (1996), a.ff'd,
347 Md. 507 (1997) ......................................... 36
United States v. Bec_fo:'d, 962 F. Supl_. 780 (E.D.Va. 1997) .......... 18
United.States v. Brockington. 849 F.2d 872 (4thCir. 1988) ............ 52
vi
Pa._gg__
United States v. Derrick, 163 F.3d 799 (4 thCir. 1998) ............... 52
United States v. Elmore, 423 F.2d 775 (4thCir. 1970), cert. denied,
400 U.S. 825 (1970) ......................................... 18
United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499 (1983) ..................... 52
United States v. Higgs, 713 F.2d 39 (3rdCir. 1983) .................. 18
United States v. Shifflett, 798 F. Supp. 354 (W.D.Va. 1992) .......... 18
United States v. Smith Grading & Paving, Inc., 760 F.2d 527
(4thCir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1005 (1985) ................. 17
Vandegrift v. State, 82 Md. App. 617, cert. denied,
320 Md. 801 (1990) ...................................... 61, 63
Ware v. State, 348 Md. 19 (1997) ............................... 16
Ware v. Staw, 360 Md. 650 (2000), cert. denied,
121 S.Ct. 864 (2001) ..................................... 36, 59
Watkins v. State, 328 Md. 95 (1992) ............................. 38
Watkins v. State, 357 Md. 258 (2000) ............................ 56
Wilhehn v. State, 272 Md. 404 (1974) ............................ 47
Williams v. State, 364 Md. 160 (2001) ........................... 39
Williams v. State, 99 Md. App. 711 (1994), aff'd on other grounds,
344 Md. 358 (1996) ......................................... 56
Wilson v. State, 363 Md. 333 (2001) .......................... 16, 19
Yeag3'.v. State, 63 Md. App. 1 (1985) ............................ 19
vii
Constitutional Provisions
United States Constitution:
Article 21 ............................................ 29
Sixth Amendment ............................... 28, passim
Rules
Maryland Rules of Procedure:
Rule 4-242 ..................................... 20, passim
Rule 4-263 ......................................... 38, 40
Rule 4-323 ......................................... 60, 61
Rule 5-403 ..................................... 37, passim
Rule 5-801 ............................................ 55
Rule 5-803 ..................................... 55, passim
Miscellaneous
Lynn McLain, Mal3'land Rules qfEvidence § 5-803 (1994) ........... 58
VII1
IN THE
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND
SEPTEMBER TERM, 2000
NO. 923
ADNAN SYED,
Appellant
V.
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
FOR BALTIMORE CITY
(Wanda Keyes Heard, Judge)
BRIEF OF APPELLEE
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellee, the State of Maryland, accepts the Statement of the Case set
forth in the brief of Appellant, Adnan Syed.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Was there any violation of Brady v. Main'land where Syed was able to
cross-examine State's witness, Jay Wilds, about all relevant aspects of his plea
agreement and the manner in which he obtained the assistance of private
counsel?