Payne v. State
211 Md. App. 220
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2013Background
- Payne and Bond were joint-tried in Baltimore County for the shooting death of Glen Stewart on charges including first-degree murder and related offenses.
- The jury acquitted Payne and Bond of first-degree premeditated murder, assault in the first degree, and conspiracy to commit kidnapping, but convicted them of first-degree felony murder, kidnapping, and use of a handgun in the commission of a felony; sentences were life imprisonment for felony murder with most of the term suspended and concurrent five-year handgun terms.
- The trial court merged the kidnapping convictions; Payne and Bond timely appealed.
- A central issue on appeal was the admissibility of cell phone tower evidence and whether it required expert foundation; the court held the tower evidence required expert qualification and that the lay testimony was error.
- The court also addressed co-conspirator hearsay from wiretaps and the admissibility of admissions against Payne and Bond, and whether a mistrial was warranted due to inadmissible testimony; the court vacated the convictions and remanded for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cell tower testimony foundation | Payne contends Detective Edwards offered lay opinion on tower locations without expert foundation. | State relied on lay testimony; no expert needed because not giving precise location. | Court held error; lay testimony on cell tower locations was improper and not harmless. |
| Co-conspirator hearsay | Payne argues wiretap statements cannot be used against him as co-conspirator statements. | State contends statements were admissible as co-conspirator or party-opponent admissions. | Court held statements admissible as party-opponent admissions; not Bruton error. |
| Mistrial over hearsay of killer identities | State’s anonymous tips naming individuals created prejudicial hearsay. | Mistrial necessary to cure prejudice. | Court denied mistrial; curative instructions and context shown no abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivenbark v. State, 311 Md. 147 (Md. 1987) (co-conspirator concealment statements admissible only before main objective achieved)
- Wilder v. State, 191 Md.App. 319 (Md. 2010) (cell-tower evidence requires expert testimony; lay testimony improper)
- Coleman-Fuller v. State, 192 Md.App. 577 (Md. 2010) (expert testimony required for cell-tower/location mapping evidence)
- Ragland v. State, 385 Md. 706 (Md. 2005) (limits on lay opinion based on specialized knowledge; expert required)
- Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (U.S. 1968) (confession of co-defendant in joint trial generally inadmissible; Bruton issue)