Paige v. State
112 A.3d 1001
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2015Background
- Victim was raped in her home on June 16, 2006; DNA later matched Devin Paige, who had formerly lived at the same address. Paige was tried and convicted by a jury of first-degree rape, third-degree sexual offense, second-degree assault, and third-degree burglary; acquitted on several other counts.
- After closing arguments, the trial judge mistakenly told jurors to inform the court when they were ready to "convict" (intended word: "reconvene"). The court immediately corrected the slip and gave a curative instruction. Defense objected but did not move for a mistrial at that time.
- Defense later moved for a new trial; an expert testified that the slip could bias jurors. The trial court denied the new-trial motion, finding the slip was isolated and adequately cured.
- At sentencing the court imposed life (all but 50 years suspended) for rape and concurrent terms: 10 years (assault), 10 years (third-degree sexual offense), 5 years (burglary).
- The State conceded assault merged with rape for sentencing; appellant argued both assault and third-degree sexual offense merged into rape because charging documents and instructions did not specify distinct assaultive acts.
- Appellant also challenged a prosecutor rebuttal remark about an unintroduced maxi-pad; trial court overruled the objection and the appellate court reviewed whether the remark was improper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Paige) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether judge's slip ("convict") and curative instruction coerced/biased jury, warranting new trial | Slip implied judge expected conviction; curative instruction was inadequate and may have reinforced prejudice | Slip was an inadvertent, isolated error promptly corrected; no further relief requested; jury instructions and verdicts show no prejudice | No abuse of discretion; denial of new trial affirmed |
| Whether second-degree assault merges with first-degree rape for sentencing | Assault and rape arise from same conduct; sentencing on both results in double punishment | State conceded assault merges into rape | Assault merged into rape; concurrent 10-year assault sentence vacated |
| Whether third-degree sexual offense merges with first-degree rape for sentencing | Charging/instructions unclear so jury may have relied on same act; lenity requires merger | Elements differ (rape requires penile vaginal intercourse; third-degree requires non-penile sexual contact); no merger | No merger; separate sentence for third-degree sexual offense upheld |
| Whether prosecutor's rebuttal comment about a maxi-pad (not admitted) was improper and prejudicial | Comment referenced testimony not in evidence and prejudiced defense | Comment was reasonable inference from detective's testimony about evidence collection and lack of usable prints; jury instructed that argument is not evidence | Overruling of objection affirmed; comment not reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Reed v. State, 225 Md. 566 (judicial slips of the tongue are common and correctable)
- Brewer v. State, 220 Md. App. 89 (standard of review for new-trial motions; abuse of discretion review)
- Brooks v. State, 439 Md. 698 (merger doctrine and protection against multiple punishments)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (required-evidence test for same-offense analysis)
- Jenkins v. State, 307 Md. 501 (if all elements of one offense are included in another, former merges)
- Green v. State, 243 Md. 75 (merging assault into rape where appropriate)
- Nalls v. State, 437 Md. 674 (penile penetration is not a basis for third-degree sexual offense conviction)