Argument Schedule -- December, 2021



September Term, 2021


Notice Regarding the Court of Appeals of Maryland December 2021 Oral Argument Session

Updated November 10, 2021

The Court of Appeals has issued a notice regarding COVID-19 related protocols for oral arguments in the December 2021 session. Please refer to the November 10, 2021 Notice for the details.

Thursday, December 2, 2021:

No. 22 Brigido Lopez-Villa v. State of Maryland

Issues – Criminal Law – Where Petitioner submitted a written request for said voir dire questions and the trial court “reviewed” the questions and ruled that it was “not inclined to ask” them “because the Court will instruct on those areas of law,” did CSA err in holding that Petitioner “failed to preserve his objection to the court’s refusal to read his proposed voir dire questions,” because he “failed to ask or tell the court that he objected to the failure to ask those specific questions,” and because when, at the end of voir dire, the trial court inquired, “[d]id I miss any questions…what you previously objected to, which I will preserve for the record,” counsel responded “no”?

Attorney for Petitioner: Piedad Gomez
Attorney for Respondent: Peter R. Naugle

AG No. 17 (2020 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Robin Keith Annesley Ficker

Attorney for Petitioner: Lydia E. Lawless
Attorney for Respondent: William C. Brennan, Jr.

Misc. No. 7 Joel Adam Dickson v. United States of America

Certified Question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Question: Under Maryland Law, can an individual be convicted of robbery by means of threatening force against property or threatening to accuse the victim of having committed sodomy?

Attorney for Appellant: Paresh S. Patel
Attorney for Appellee: Jason D. Medinger


Friday, December 3, 2021:

Misc. No. 5 Jesse J. Murphy, et al. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Certified Question from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

Question: Did the Court of Appeals act within its enabling authority under, inter alia, the State Constitution and the State Declaration of Rights when its April 24, 2020 Administrative Order tolled Maryland's statutes of limitation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Attorney for Appellant: Joseph Larry Katz
Attorney for Appellee: Shannon Briglia

No. 24 Arthur Becker, et al. v. Falls Road Community Association et al.

Issue – Zoning & Planning – In order for collateral estoppel to bar a subsequently filed development plan, must the two plans be found to be identical?

Attorney for Petitioner: Timothy M. Kotroco
Attorney for Respondent: Michael R. McCann


Monday, December 6, 2021:

No. 23 State of Maryland v. Latoya Jordan

Issue – Criminal Law – Is it harmless error to fail to propound a voir dire question regarding a defendant’s right to remain silent and not testify where the defendant actually testifies?

Attorney for Petitioner: Andrew J. DiMiceli
Attorney for Respondent: Stephanie Asplundh

AG No. 41 (2020 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Lawrence Daniel O'Neill

Attorney for Petitioner: Erin A. Risch
Attorney for Respondent: Lawrence Daniel O'Neill

Misc. No. 6 Nagle & Zaller, P.C., et al. v. Jahmal E. Delegall, et al.

Certified Question from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

Question: The Maryland Consumer Loan Law, Md. Code Ann., Commercial Law §§12-301, et seq., applies to consumer "loans" made by "lenders," and requires a "person engaged in the business of making loans" to be licensed. Based upon the allegations in the Third Amended Complaint, is Nagle & Zaller, P.C. subject to the statute??

Attorney for Appellant: Richard A. Simpson
Attorney for Appellee: Martin E. Wolf


Tuesday, December 7, 2021:

No. 16 Daniel Beckwitt v. State of Maryland

Issues – Criminal Law – 1) As a matter of first impression, was the evidence legally sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to find that Petitioner was guilty of involuntary manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt for permitting the victim to work in a home with hoarding conditions accompanied by power outages? 2) As a matter of first impression, is legal duty manslaughter a type of gross negligence manslaughter that serves as a lesser-included offense of depraved-heart murder, thereby requiring review of Petitioner’s challenges to the legal duty manslaughter conviction? 3) Did the trial court commit reversible error by failing to instruct the essential elements of legal duty manslaughter, for which there is no pattern jury instruction? 4) As a matter of first impression, did the trial court lack subject matter jurisdiction to enter a conviction against an occupant of a home on a common law involuntary manslaughter charge resulting from an accidental house fire? 5) As a matter of first impression, does the line separating second-degree depraved heart murder and gross negligence manslaughter depend upon the likelihood of death and, if so, was the evidence sufficient in this case to support the jury’s verdict of second-degree murder?

Attorney for Petitioner: Megan E. Coleman
Attorney for Respondent: Carrie J. Williams

No. 25 Maryland Small MS4 Coalition, et al. v. Maryland Department of the Environment

Issues – Environmental Law – 1) Has Maryland Department of the Environment (“MDE”) unlawfully made the Queen Anne’s County (“County”) responsible for the discharges from independent third parties and nonpoint source runoff that do not discharge from the County’s MS4? 3) Has MDE unlawfully imposed requirements beyond the maximum extent practicable in the General Permit?

Attorneys for Petitioner: Lisa M. Ochsenhirt and Christopher D. Pomeroy
Attorney for Respondent: Matthew P. Clagett



On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk's Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified. After December 7, 2021, the Court will recess until January 6, 2022.