Wimbish v. State
201 Md. App. 239
| Md. Ct. Spec. App. | 2011Background
- Wimbish, a Bloods member, led a Columbia-area group in an attempted armed robbery that resulted in Batts's death.
- The plan targeted Elijah Jackson; Jackson had provided information to police about a Bloods member.
- Collectively, Bloods members transported a shotgun and located Elijah Jackson; Johnson fired through a car window, wounding Batts fatally.
- Police arrested Wimbish on July 2, 2008; he was charged with murder-related counts, conspiracy, and multiple weapons offenses.
- At trial, a jury convicted him of conspiracy to commit armed robbery, attempted armed robbery of Elijah Jackson, and three weapons offenses; he was sentenced to a total of 43 years.
- The court vacated the conviction for possession of a regulated firearm by a person under 21 and affirmed the remaining judgments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of custodial statements | Wimbish argues he invoked counsel; police continued questioning. | State contends invocations were ambiguous or pre-waiver and allowed clarifications; later unambiguous request ended interrogation. | No error; statements proper and admissible. |
| Admissibility of gang-affiliation evidence | Evidence inflamed jury prejudice and should have been excluded. | Evidence relevant to motive; defendant did not preserve objection to some testimony. | Waived preservation; admissible under Rule 5-404(b) for motive. |
| Jury instruction using 'crime of violence' stipulation | Use of 'crime of violence' was improper under Carter and prejudicial. | Stipulation properly admitted and invited no reversible error. | Not preserved; invited error; no reversal. |
| Voir dire questioning | Questions linking bias to status/experience improper. | Questions were permissible state-of-mind inquiries under Thomas. | Waived; questions permissible and not reversible. |
| Merger/sentencing of firearm convictions | Three firearm convictions should merge for sentencing. | Unit-of-prosecution and merger analysis require differentiation; lenity considered if ambiguity. | Conviction under 5-133(c) vacated; other judgments affirmed; Melton and Dixon analyses applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (Supreme Court, 1994) (unambiguous post-waiver invocation required to end interrogation)
- Ballard v. State, 420 Md. 480 (Md. 2011) (unambiguous request for attorney differs from ambiguous phrases)
- Freeman v. State, 158 Md.App. 402 (Md. App. 2004) (pre-waiver invocation standard clarifications permitted)
- Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. _ (Supreme Court, 2010) (post-waiver invocation standard extended to pre-waiver context (dissent commentary noted))
- Melton v. State, 379 Md. 471 (Md. 2004) (unit of prosecution for possession of regulated firearms; counts may not merge)
- Dixon v. State, 364 Md. 209 (Md. 2001) (required-evidence test for merger of offenses)
- Dingle v. State, 361 Md. 1 (Md. 2000) (prohibits certain compound voir-dire questions about bias and experiences)