Peterson v. State
10 A.3d 838
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2010Background
- Peterson was convicted by jury in circuit court of second degree assault, second degree assault on a law enforcement officer, theft under $500, and related traffic offenses; total three-year sentence.
- Off-duty sheriff Roberts observed Howard Peterson steal meat at Wal-Mart and saw Lionel Peterson drive off in a Cadillac after running over Roberts' foot.
- Fellow officer Funk stopped the Cadillac; appellant denied hitting anyone, later admitting Roberts had been hurt and that he saw a man at Wal-Mart connected to the theft.
- Debbie Damico identified appellant as a Food Lion theft suspect; Howard testified at trial that Roberts injured himself when approaching the Cadillac.
- Appellant, proceeding pro se, attempted to call witnesses including his brother for alibi/character testimony; the trial court limited or excluded certain witnesses for nondisclosure reasons.
- The court conducted multi-step Rule 4-215 waivers for counsel; trial proceeded after determining no meritorious reason for lack of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver by inaction under Rule 4-215 | Waiver was proper; inaction supported waiver. | Waiver was not merited; court failed to properly inquire. | Waiver upheld; no abuse of discretion. |
| Exclusion of character/alibi witnesses | Disclosures were insufficient; exclusion prejudiced defense. | Nondisclosures warranted sanctions; evaluation within court’s discretion. | No reversible error; ruling within discretion; any error harmless. |
| Plain error in jury instruction on second degree assault of a law enforcement officer | Instruction allowed conviction for recklessness rather than intent requirement. | No preserved error; plain error review not warranted. | No plain error; preservation requirement applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grant v. State, 414 Md. 483 (Md. 2010) (recognizes right to counsel and Faretta-inspired waiver concepts)
- State v. Camper, 415 Md. 44 (Md. 2010) (strict Rule 4-215 waiver compliance is required)
- Brye v. State, 410 Md. 623 (Md. 2009) (knowingly intelligent waiver; meritorious reasons considered)
- Broadwater v. State, 401 Md. 175 (Md. 2007) (three-part test for meritorious reasons in waiver-by-inaction)
- Gray v. State, 338 Md. 106 (Md. 1995) (Gray's timing on OPD application distinguished from present case)
- McCracken v. State, 150 Md.App. 330 (Md. Ct. App. 2003) (course of continuances and familiarity with defendant's lack of counsel)
- Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 (Md. 1976) (harmless-error standard for evidentiary issues)
- Thomas v. State, 397 Md. 557 (Md. 2007) (sanctions for discovery failures; broad discretion of trial court)
- Hutchinson v. State, 406 Md. 219 (Md. 2008) (Rule 4-263 amendments; disclosure requirements)
- McMillan v. State, 181 Md.App. 298 (Md. Ct. App. 2008) (preservation of jury-instruction errors in appeals)