Abruquah v. State, 240 A.3d 868

Petitioner Kobina Ebo Abruquah was convicted in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County of first‑degree murder and use of a handgun; he received life plus 20 years.
Petitioner moved in limine to exclude firearm/toolmark identification testimony, arguing the methodology was unreliable and no longer generally accepted under Frye‑Reed.
The circuit court declined to hold a formal Frye‑Reed hearing but conducted an extensive six‑day evidentiary hearing with expert testimony and documentary evidence; it ruled toolmark methods remain generally accepted and allowed the expert to opine on attribution but barred statements of "absolute or scientific certainty."
The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s ruling.
The Court of Appeals granted certiorari, vacated the Court of Special Appeals’ judgment, and GVR‑remanded the case to the Court of Special Appeals with directions to remand to the circuit court under Maryland Rule 8‑604(d)(1) so the circuit court can consider whether, in light of this Court’s decision in Rochkind v. Stevenson (which addressed Daubert), it would reach a different conclusion concerning admission of firearm/toolmark testimony.
Justices Watts and Hotten dissented: they argued the GVR wastes resources because the circuit court already held an extensive hearing, the Daubert issue was not preserved at trial, and the record does not support a new Daubert challenge.

Issue	Abruquah (Plaintiff)	State (Defendant)	Held
Whether this case should be GVR‑remanded for reconsideration in light of Rochkind/Daubert	Argued the Court could evaluate reliability under Daubert if Frye‑Reed replaced by Daubert	Argued the evidentiary rulings were proper and Daubert was not preserved; trial court already held extensive hearing	Court granted certiorari, vacated COA judgment, and remanded for the circuit court to reconsider in light of Rochkind whether it would reach a different conclusion
Whether Daubert analysis was preserved for appellate review	Suggested Daubert could apply given Rochkind (raised in petition footnote)	Contended Daubert was not raised below and thus not preserved	Majority remanded for reconsideration; dissent said Daubert issue not preserved and remand unnecessary
Admissibility of firearms/toolmark identification evidence under Frye‑Reed	Contended toolmark examination is no longer generally accepted and is unreliable	Maintained toolmark methods remain generally accepted and the expert’s methodology was reliable	Circuit court after hearing found toolmark examination generally accepted and admitted limited attribution testimony; COA had affirmed before this Court’s GVR

Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) (established the general‑acceptance test for scientific evidence)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (articulated federal admissibility factors emphasizing reliability and relevance)
Reed v. State, 283 Md. 374 (1978) (Maryland adoption of Frye‑style general‑acceptance analysis)
Savage v. State, 455 Md. 138 (2017) (discussed Maryland’s evolving approach to expert‑evidence standards)
Sissoko v. State, 236 Md. App. 676 (2018) (observed Maryland jurisprudence has drifted toward Daubert‑like analysis)
Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314 (1987) (holding new rules of criminal procedure generally apply to cases pending on direct appeal)