Martin v. Maryland
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear Martin's petition, so the Maryland ruling stayed in place and the jury-unanimity question was not decided.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · June 1, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court denied Charles Brandon Martin’s petition for review, leaving the Maryland court’s ruling in place and giving Maryland the result it sought.
- Who it affects
- The Maryland ruling remains in place for Martin, but this docket did not resolve the constitutional question about unanimous verdicts.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Martin’s petition raised claims about withheld evidence, jury selection, prosecutorial argument, and confrontation rights, but the Court did not decide those issues on the merits.
Charles Brandon Martin's petition raised claims about evidence he said was withheld, jury selection, prosecutors' arguments, and his right to question witnesses. The Supreme Court did not decide those claims.
Martin asked the Supreme Court to review a ruling by Maryland's Court of Special Appeals.
Question presented
Whether the Sixth Amendment’s right to a jury trial, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires a unanimous jury verdict to convict a defendant of a serious offense?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
The Maryland ruling remains in place, and this Supreme Court docket action is complete.
Documents
Opinions
Key filings
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.