SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2017
Thursday, January 4, 2018:
Misc. No. 22 In Re the Application of David Louis Silverman, Jr. for Admission to the Bar of Maryland
Attorney for Applicant: Jay D. Miller
No. 44 In the Matter of Sue A. Weintraub for the Appointment of a Guardian of the Property
Issue – Estates & Trusts – Did CSA err in finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Petitioner’s motion to vacate?
Attorneys for Petitioner: Edward Peter Parent and Steven Silverman
Attorney for Respondent: Ria Piesner Rochvarg
No. 38 Amy Shealer v. George Straka
Issues – Estates & Trusts – 1) Did CSA err in holding that probate proceedings are to be stayed upon the filing of a caveat petition before judicial probate or after administrative probate, continuing the procedure under predecessor statutes recognized by Keene v. Corse, 80 Md. 20 (1984) and its progeny, despite the enactment of Estates & Trusts Article §5-207(b) which omits any language concerning a stay of proceedings from its text? 2) Was the harmless error standard satisfied by merely showing that the underlying decision from which an appeal is sought is final and binding upon the parties?
Attorneys for Petitioner: Geoffrey Warren Washington and Mary Rose E. Cook
Attorney for Respondent: Matthew S. Ballard
No. 36 Leroy C. Bell, Jr. and Bon Secours Hospital Baltimore, Inc. v. Patricia Chance, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Brandon Mackey
Issue – Torts – In a wrongful death action based on a suicide, is a defendant psychiatrist who discharged the decedent instead of continuing his involuntary commitment entitled to civil immunity under Health-General Article § 10-618 and Williams v. Peninsula Regional Medical Center, 440 Md. 573, 103 A.3d 658 (2014)?
Attorney for Petitioner: David James McManus, Jr.
Attorney for Respondent: Wes Patrick Henderson
No. 29 State of Maryland v. Crystal Brookman; State of Maryland v. Marvin Randy Carnes
Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) Do sanctions, imposed by a trial court in conjunction with participation in the problem-solving Drug Court programs in Respondents’ criminal cases, not constitute court action subject to appellate review where there is no finding of a violation of probation? 2) If properly before CSA for review, did the trial court properly impose the Drug Court menu sanctions provided for in Respondents’ cases for Respondents’ respective violations of the conditions of their Drug Court participation? 3) Is this controversy moot? 4) Does Rule 16-206(e) permit a drug court to impose a sanction involving the loss of a defendant’s liberty in violation of the drug court agreement? 5) Is a Drug Court sanction involving a loss of liberty imposed in violation of the protocols of Rule 16-206(e) and the drug court agreement a reviewable judgment pursuant to an application for leave to appeal?
Attorney for Petitioner: Mary Anne Ince
Attorney for Respondent: Isabelle Roxane Raquin
AG No. 90 (2016 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Anna G. Aita
Attorney for Petitioner: Amy S. Paulick
Attorney for Respondent: Andrew J. Graham
No. 52 State of Maryland v. Robert Clifford Weddington
Issue – Criminal Procedure – Did CSA err in holding that where a criminal defendant expresses dissatisfaction with counsel in a letter to the court less than two weeks prior to a trial date, received by the clerk’s office four days before trial, and of which the trial judge was not aware at the time of trial, the defendant has satisfactorily invoked Md. Rule 4-215, and did not waive the rule by failing to express his dissatisfaction to the judge during trial?
Attorney for Petitioner: Virginia S. Hovermill
Attorneys for Respondent: Wyatt Anthony Feeler and Anne Kathryn Olesen
No. 42 Motor Vehicle Administration v. Megan E. Smith
Issue – Transportation – Did the ALJ err in dismissing an Order of Suspension for a driver who had a breath-test result of .18 blood-alcohol concentration because the investigating officer refused to allow her to visit the rest room before submitting to a breath test, where the officer (1) had reasonable grounds to believe that she had been driving while under the influence of alcohol and 2) fully and correctly advised her of the administrative sanctions that could be imposed?
Attorney for Petitioner: Dore J. Lebowitz
Arguing for Respondent: Megan E. Smith (pro se)
Misc. No. 5 (2016 T.) In the Matter of The Honorable Pamela J. White
Attorney for Appellant: Andrew Jay Graham
Attorneys for Appellee: Bruce L. Marcus
No. 35 April Ademiluyi v. Maryland State Board of Elections; Administrator State Board of Elections, Linda Lamone; State Governor, Lawrence Hogan; Judge Ingrid Turner
Attorney for Appellant: April T. Ademiluyi
Attorney for Appellee: Michele Joan McDonald
No. 49 State of Maryland v. Bashunn Christopher Phillips
Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Was Respondent precluded from taking an interlocutory appeal of a non-constitutional evidentiary ruling by the trial court? 2) Are the statutory limitations on State appeals inapplicable to State requests for in banc review?
Attorneys for Petitioner: Robert K. Taylor, Jr. and Wes Adams
Attorney for Respondent: Rachel Anne Simmonsen
On the day of argument, counsel are instructed to register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified.
After January 9, 2018, the Court will recess until February 1, 2018.
BESSIE M. DECKER