Massey v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Schneider v. Schneider

    335 Md. 500 (Md. 1994)   Cited 18 times
    Noting Maryland's public policy "favoring the enforcement of agreements for spousal support"

    The direct sanction for perjury is prosecution as a criminal offense. Md. Code (1957, 1992 Repl. Vol.), Art. 27, § 435. By Chapter 371 of the Acts of 1991, Art. 27, § 439 was amended to make perjury punishable by imprisonment in the jail "or penitentiary." Uncodified § 2 of Ch. 371 provides that "there is no statute of limitations for a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, notwithstanding any holding or dictum to the contrary in Massey v. State, 320 Md. 605, 579 A.2d 265 (1990)." Whether Janet — and Mark — should be prosecuted is a matter committed to the discretion of the State's Attorney for Frederick County.

  2. Brooks v. State

    85 Md. App. 355 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1991)   Cited 33 times
    Finding that when a defendant fails to demonstrate any evidence of the jury's inability or refusal to heed court's instruction, mere speculation that the "jury could not possibly have discharged [its] task appropriately . . . is totally insufficient"

    Thus, had the conspiracy counts been charged after the effective date of that section, there would be no question as to their viability. See also Massey v. State, 320 Md. 605, 579 A.2d 265 (1990). Seizing upon the dismissal and noting that co-conspirator testimony had been introduced in connection with the dismissed charges, appellant moved for mistrial. He argued that the co-conspirator testimony was inadmissible as a result of the dismissal.