Cottman v. State, 395 Md. 729

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that a circuit court retained fundamental jurisdiction to grant the defendant a new trial while his appeal was pending. The new trial vacated the underlying judgment and rendered the pending appeal moot, requiring the Court of Special Appeals to dismiss the appeal and reflect that disposition in its mandate, although it could leave its published discussion of important legal issues in place.

Holdings

1. A circuit court is not deprived of its fundamental jurisdiction to take post-judgment action merely because an appeal from the judgment is pending. The circuit court therefore retained jurisdiction to grant Cottman a new trial.
2. The circuit court's grant of a new trial rendered the appeal moot because it eliminated the judgment of conviction and sentence that formed the basis of the appeal.
3. The Court of Special Appeals had no choice but to reflect in its mandate that the appeal was dismissed on grounds of mootness after learning that the circuit court had granted a new trial.
4. The Court of Special Appeals was permitted to leave its opinion expressing views on the moot legal issue on the books, although its mandate had to dismiss the appeal. The Court of Appeals did not order withdrawal of the opinion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a circuit court retains fundamental jurisdiction to grant a defendant a new trial while an appeal from the original judgment is pending.
2. Whether granting a new trial while the appeal is pending vacates the judgment under review and renders the appeal moot.
3. Whether the Court of Special Appeals was required to dismiss the appeal after learning that the circuit court had granted a new trial.
4. Whether the Court of Special Appeals was required to withdraw its already-issued opinion.

Disposition

vacated