Tirado v. State

Decision Date20 August 1993
PartiesTirado (Eric Joseph) v. State NO. 176
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Reported below: 95 Md.App. 536, 622 A.2d 187.

denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Pugh v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1994
    ... ... Accordingly, the court's instruction in the case sub judice "fairly covered" the necessary elements of drug possession; the court did not err in refusing to grant appellant's precise instruction. See Tirado v. State, 95 Md.App. 536, 558-60, 622 A.2d 187, cert. denied, 331 Md. 481, 628 A.2d 1067 (1993); Harris v. State, 11 Md.App. 658, 664, 276 A.2d 406, cert. denied, 262 Md. 747 (1971) ...         JUDGMENTS AFFIRMED; APPELLANTS TO PAY COSTS ... --------------- ... 1 At trial, Trooper ... ...
  • Simpson v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1997
    ... ... State, 348 Md. 19, 68, 702 A.2d 699 (1997)(quoting State v. Cox, 298 Md. 173, 178, 468 A.2d 319 (1983)). Furthermore, questions that assume facts not in evidence are objectionable. Tirado v. State, 95 Md.App. 536, 550, 622 A.2d 187, cert. denied, 331 Md. 481, 628 A.2d 1067 (1993) ...         In the present case, the trial court permitted appellant to inquire as to whether Officer Yost knew the law. He did not preclude appellant from asking Officer Yost whether he knew of ... ...
  • Robertson v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1996
    ... ... United States, 619 A.2d 16, 19 (D.C.1992) ... Page 387 ...         A requested instruction that is otherwise applicable under the facts and circumstances of the case need not be given when it has been fairly covered in the instructions actually propounded by the court. Tirado v. State, 95 Md.App. 536, 622 A.2d 187, cert. denied, 331 Md. 481, 628 A.2d 1067 (1993). In the case at bar, the instructions propounded by the trial judge merely set forth the elements of the offense and the State's burden of proof. In Pulley, we held that the trial court's general instructions ... ...
  • Ruth v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • June 1, 2000
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT