Cox v. State, 28 A.3d 687

Petitioner Ronald Cox was convicted by a Baltimore City jury of first-degree murder and related offenses for a 2007 killing.
The State introduced an out-of-court confession by a jailhouse informant, Michael West, and also relied on the testimony of Johnson and others.
The defense challenged (a) West’s hearsay and Confrontation Clause implications, (b) suppression of statements Petitioner allegedly made to West, and (c) the sufficiency of the evidence.
The Court of Special Appeals upheld admission of West’s testimony as nontestimonial and attenuated from an unlawful arrest, found tacit admissions admissible, and affirmed trial evidence sufficiency.
The Court of Appeals granted certiorari to review these issues and affirmed the Court of Special Appeals in full.
At trial, evidence included a gun found in a car during a lawful stop, the medical examiner’s homicide finding, and West’s testimony about Johnson’s and Petitioner's statements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether West’s jailhouse statements violated the Confrontation Clause.	Cox argued West’s statements were testimonial and tainted by unlawful arrest.	The State contended statements were nontestimonial and sufficiently attenuated from the illegality.	No; statements were nontestimonial and admissible.
Whether West’s testimony should have been suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree.	Cox argued taint from illegal stop/search tainted West’s testimony.	State contended attenuation and intervening voluntariness purged taint.	No; attenuation factors supported admission.
Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions.	Extrajudicial confession plus limited corroboration could be insufficient.	Additional corroboration from crime scene and medical examiner supported corpus delicti.	Yes; sufficient evidence supported all convictions.

Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (establishes framework for testimonial vs. nontestimonial statements)
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (U.S. 2006) (test for testimonial nature of statements during police interrogation)
Bryant v. Michigan, 562 U.S. _ (U.S. 2011) (capacity to consider ongoing emergency; framework for Confrontation analysis)
Dutton v. Evans, 400 U.S. 74 (U.S. 1970) (early treatment of nonofficial statement by accomplice to fellow inmate)
Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (U.S. 2008) (forfeiture by wrongdoing exception; limits Confrontation Clause applicability to testimonial statements)
Smalls, 605 F.3d 765 (10th Cir. 2010) (inmates’ casual statements may be nontestimonial under Davis/Bryant framework)
Miles v. State, 365 Md. 488 (Md. 2001) (attenuation factors for taint of illegal police conduct)
Woods v. State, 315 Md. 591 (Md. 1994) (corroboration of confession by independent evidence can sustain conviction)