Howard v. State
103 A.3d 572
Md.2014Background
- Howard was arrested on October 8, 2008 and charged with first-degree rape and related offenses in Baltimore City.
- Trial was scheduled for February 23, 2009, but the circuit court postponed eight times; many postponements were joint or State requests.
- Howard discharged his first and then second counsel, leading to further postponements and advisements by the court about the penalties and right to counsel.
- On January 21, 2011, Howard expressly waived the right to counsel after the court ensured proper notice and advisement under Maryland Rule 4-215.
- Howard moved on January 26, 2011 for a postponement to obtain counsel and to review discovery; the trial judge (not the administrative judge or designee) denied the motion.
- Trial began January 31, 2011, with a jury convicting Howard; the Court of Special Appeals affirmed; this Court granted certiorari for review of postures under CP § 6-103 and Md. Rule 4-271.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority of a circuit judge to deny a postponement | Howard: only county admin judges may deny postponements. | State: any circuit judge may deny a postponement under CP § 6-103(b) and Md. Rule 4-271(a)(1). | Any circuit court judge may deny a motion to postpone. |
| Duty to question a self-represented defendant when waiver of counsel is express | Howard: denial should require questioning under Jones to obtain counsel. | State: no questioning required after express waiver; Rule 4-215(b) compliance suffices. | No abuse of discretion in not questioning after express waiver. |
| Postponement to review discovery materials when discovery allegedly provided late | Howard: delay was needed to review discovery provided within the prior week. | State: discovery was already provided; postponement not required; Rule 4-263 guidance applies. | No abuse of discretion in denying postponement to review discovery materials. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. State, 403 Md. 267 (2008) (denial of postponement by non-administrative judge proper under doctrine)
- Frazier v. State, 298 Md. 422 (1984) (postponement authority lies with administrative judge; grants analyzed)
- Calhoun v. State, 299 Md. 1 (1984) (administrative judge designee handles postponements; dicta on denial)
- Brown v. State, 355 Md. 89 (1999) (postponement authority reserved to administrative judge; grants focus)
- Dorsey v. State, 349 Md. 688 (1998) (postponement framework and role of administrative judge)