*Joshua Gehret
The Maryland Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court for Baltimore County abused its discretion when, upon request during voir dire, it declined to question prospective jurors’ willingness and ability to follow jury instructions on fundamental principles of the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and the defendant’s right to not testify, overruling Twining v. State. Kazadi v. State, 467 Md. 1, 223 A.3d 554 (2020).
I. Introduction
In Kazadi v. State, the Court of Appeals of Maryland (Court of Appeals) overruled its decision in Twining v. State, holding that trial courts commit an abuse of discretion when declining to ask prospective jurors whether they can follow the court’s instructions on the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and the defendant’s right not to testify.[1] To reach this decision, the Court of Appeals determined that significant changes in the law superseded Twining.[2] The Court’s decision mandates that trial courts question prospective jurors—about the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and the defendant’s right not to testify—if requested during voir dire.[3] The Kazadi holding adopts the presumption that jurors may be unable or unwilling to follow the law according to the trial court’s instructions, which may significantly affect how Maryland courts conduct voir dire and help ensure selection of impartial juries.[4]
Continue reading “Highest Case Note from Write-On 2020: Kazadi v. State, 467 Md. 1, 223 A.3d 554 (2020)”