Title: State v. Rodgers

State: maryland

Issuer: Maryland Supreme Court

Document:

Circuit Court for Baltimore County 
Case No. C-03-CR-19-000076 
 
 
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
 
OF MARYLAND 
 
 
No. 67 
 
 
September Term, 2021 
 
 
 
          
STATE OF MARYLAND 
 
 
v. 
 
 
DE’SHON C. RODGERS 
 
     
 
 
Fader, C.J. 
Watts  
Hotten 
      
Booth 
Biran 
Gould 
Eaves,   
 
 
 JJ. 
 
 
 
 
    PER CURIAM ORDER       
      
 
 
Filed: April 28, 2022 
 
 
Pursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal 
Materials Act 
(§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. 
 
 
 
 
 
Suzanne C. Johnson, Clerk 
2022-04-28 09:48-04:00
 
STATE OF MARYLAND 
 
* 
IN THE 
 
  
 
* 
COURT OF APPEALS 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
*  
OF MARYLAND 
v. 
  
 
* 
COA-REG-0067-2021     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
* 
No. 67 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DE’SHON C. RODGERS 
 
 
* 
September Term, 2021 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PER CURIAM ORDER 
 
                            
 
The Court having considered and granted the petition for a writ of certiorari in the 
above-captioned case, it is this 28th day of April, 2022 
 
 
ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the judgment of the Court 
of Special Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to that Court to consider whether 
or not the holding in Lopez-Villa v. State, No. 22 (September Term, 2021) should be applied 
in this case and, if so, to reconsider its prior opinion concerning whether the trial court 
erred in not asking requested voir dire question(s); and it is further 
 
ORDERED, that the case is remanded to the Court of Special Appeals for 
consideration and resolution of the remaining two issues raised on brief by Respondent, 
De’Shon C. Rodgers, before that Court, namely: 
Did the trial court err by permitting Officer Brian H. Carver to offer expert 
testimony about Rodgers’ actions in an aerial video without being qualified 
as an expert witness? 
 
Did the trial court err by preventing defense counsel from cross-examining 
Officer Alexander A. Pearson about his failure to comply with department 
policy that required him to file a complaint against Officer First Class Thorne 
A. Allen for use of excessive force? 
 
and it is further 
 
ORDERED, that costs are to be paid by Respondent. 
 
 
          /s/ Matthew J. Fader 
     Chief Judge