Source: https://thewesternmarylandadvocate.com/2016/07/04/defense-access-to-police-personnel-file/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 13:06:23+00:00

Document:
ABSTRACT: The following is a sample argument for defense access to a police officer’s personnel file, based on misconduct. In a proper context, a litigator might make a similar argument to access records in a motion for tangible evidence prior to trial.
This entry was posted in - Criminal Law, ---- Paul Notarianni and tagged - Criminal Law, 298 Md. 173, 326 Md. 54, 81-87 (1992), 337 Md. 112, 354 Md. 287, 376 Md. 661, 415 U.S. 308, Article 21, Clayton Colkley v. Maryland, Court of Appeals, Cox v. State, Darnell Fields v. Maryland, Davis v. Alaska, Discovery, Goldsmith v. State, Maryland, Maryland Rule 5-608, Motion for Tangible Evidenc, Notarianni, Pantazes v. State, Paul, Police Officer, Robinson v. State, Sixth Amendment, The Maryland Advocate, Zaal, Zaal v. State. Bookmark the permalink.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.