I really want to try this game.

In light of Maryland’s statutory requirement that a challenge to a recorded deed of trust based on an allegedly improper affidavit of consideration and disbursement must be brought within six months of recordation, may a lienholder challenge an earlier-recorded deed of trust on the basis of an allegedly defective affidavit of consideration and disbursement, if such challenge is not filed until 18 months after recordation?

I would provide an analysis of the answer but I don't even understand the question. Of course, there are a lot of personal injury related questions the court addresses that Maryland property lawyers could not begin to understand. The amazing thing to me is the appellate courts have to be able to get their minds fully around both areas of law and many, many more. Judges are basically general practice lawyers. There are not too many general practice lawyers out there anymore because there is just too much to know. Which underscores how hard it is to be a judge.

Our house is a very, very, very fine house, With two [cops] in the yard; Life used to be so hard, Now everything is [seized] ’cause of you.

In a footnote, Judge Harrell apologizes to Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young "for tinkering with the lyrics" from their song, “Our House,” from their 1970 album, Deja Vu.

The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the trial court that threw out erroneously seized evidence from an improper search, finding that the evidence recovered would be admissible under the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule.

I really should not be spending my time reviewing criminal cases. I try to take a quick glance at all new opinions, including criminal opinions, just to see if there is anything of interest to my practice. The lead-in to this case got my attention and I kept reading.

You can find the opinion in Marshall v. State here.

This may cause the congressman who had their picture taken with him before Clemens testified some chagrin.

I had a hard time believing that Clemens would be so bold as lie after he said he wanted to testify after Congress was apparently willing to let him off the mat and not require him to testify. Obviously, federal prosecutors think he is just that bold. I do not think it is huge news that the grand jury chose to indict Clemens because it is not hard for a federal prosecutor to get an indictment. But it clearly shows the prosecutors believe they can get a conviction.

I'm all for prosecuting those who lie to Congress although I think it was inane that Roger Clemens was testifying before Congress in the first place.

Now the best pitcher and the best hitter of in the last 20 years are both under indictment.

Brian McNamee has a defamation lawsuit pending in New York. What is the value of that claim now? The vast, vast majority of defamation claims have two fatal flaws: (1) the defendant has no money, and (2) the defamation is not that widespread to cause significant harm. In this case, the world only knows who Brian McNamee is because of the alleged defamation. Neither of these circumstances are present here.

• Clemens loses appeal in civil case
• New York Times article

I have a hard time figuring out why anyone would oppose this and I really can't figure out what the theoretical constitutional basis would be for striking this statute.

Clemens is certainly welcome to refile his case in New York. I'm betting that with the FBI investigation, he will be smart enough to leave well enough alone.

The first issue discusses the admissibility of expert testimony concerning scientific or forensic evidence in Maryland under the Frye-Reed standard, which provides that scientific techniques can be admissible at trial if they are “generally accepted” in the medical and/or scientific community. The second involves the doctrine of harmless error, which applies in defining the scope of cross-examination.

In many personal injury car accident trials in Maryland, a trial can pass with few rulings that are not completely discretionary for the court. If a plaintiff prevails at trial, there are not many issues for the defendant's lawyer to attack. So it is not uncommon to get motions for new trials after a verdict that involves discretionary rulings and errors that are clearly harmless.

Why the interest? The plain clothed Maryland state trooper cut the motorcyclist off and yelled at him while brandishing a gun before identifying himself as a trooper.

If someone came into my office claiming this, I would assume he was not telling the truth. But in many cases, the video cuts through the he said/she said.

It is unlikely this man will ever spend a day in jail. The Maryland attorney general's office has given the opinion that Maryland's wiretap law does not apply to traffic stops because the conversation is not private.

This is one of those "I cannot believe this has not been conclusively resolved yet" type of issues.