Case Title: Baker v. State (on motion for recon)

Citation: 383 Md. 550

Docket Number: 14mr/04

State: maryland

Court: Maryland Supreme Court

Date: 2004-11-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
Circuit Court for Harfo rd Coun ty
Case # 92C0088
   ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF
MARYLAND
No. 14
September Term, 2004
Wesley Eugene Baker
v.
State of Maryland
Bell, C. J.
Raker
Wilner
Cathell
Harrell
Battaglia
Greene,
JJ.
Per Curiam
Filed:   November 10, 2004
1Furthermore, the argument appears to be unrelated to the questions presented on
appeal.  
Upon Motion for Reconsideration, Wesley Eugene Baker, by his attorneys, argues
that the decision in the above entitled case should be reconsidered in order for the Court to
address an argument made in Baker’s brief at this court.  That argument is identified in
Baker’s Motion for Reconsideration as:
“Maryland Statutory Provisions Permitting Proof in Aggravation to be
Presented Regardless of Its Admissibility Under the Rules Governing
Admission of Evidence at Criminal Trials and In Derogation of the Sixth
Amendment Right of Confrontation Render Appellant’s Sentence and
Maryland’s Statutory Scheme Unconstitutional.”
We grant the Motion to Reconsider and hold that the issue was not preserved for
appellate review.  In the trial court the State argued that the issue above had not been raised
in the trial court nor preserved by objection at trial.  In responding to the State’s answer, and
in a subsequent motion for the trial court to reconsider its denial of the relevant motion filed
below, Baker did not challenge the State’s position on the issue of preservation.
Accordingly, that issue is not preserved.1