Abdul-Maleek v. State

Docket Number46/11
Decision Date27 April 2012
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
61 cases
  • 120 W. Fayette St., LLLP v. Mayor & City Council of Balt.
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • April 27, 2012
    ... ... The Trust's Director and the State Historic Preservation Officer, J. Rodney Little, rejected the first four sets of redevelopment plans submitted by the City. On December 22, 2010, Mr ... ...
  • Taylor v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • April 2, 2018
    ...during a sentencing proceeding." Sharp v. State , 446 Md. 669, 683, 133 A.3d 1089, 1097 (2016) ; see Abdul–Maleek v. State , 426 Md. 59, 69, 43 A.3d 383, 389 (2012) (held unpreserved where a defendant failed to object to the trial court's evidentiary consideration during a sentencing procee......
  • State v. Elson
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • June 3, 2014
    ...victims or witnesses from the act of having to testify, remains an improper factor to consider in sentencing. See Abdul–Maleek v. State, 426 Md. 59, 73–74, 43 A.3d 383 (2012) (remanding for resentencing because trial court's remarks referring to victim having to testify twice could lead to ......
  • Carter v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • August 29, 2018
    ...that his or her sentence was unconstitutional or motivated by ill-will, prejudice or other impermissible considerations. Abdul-Maleek v. State, 426 Md. 59, 71 (2012) (internal citations and quotations omitted). A sentencing court is encouraged to explain its reasoning, however, because "jus......
  • Get Started for Free