Reed, Robert Anthony v. State

Circuit Court for Prince George’s County
Case No. CT922030X
*This is a per curiam opinion. Under Rule 1-104, the opinion is not precedent within the
rule of stare decisis nor may it be cited as persuasive authority.
UNREPORTED
IN THE APPELLATE COURT
OF MARYLAND
No. 2656
September Term, 2025
______________________________________
ROBERT ANDREW REED
v.
STATE OF MARYLAND
______________________________________
Wells, C.J.,
Ripken,
Eyler, Deborah S.
(Senior Judge, Specially Assigned),
JJ.
______________________________________
PER CURIAM
______________________________________
Filed: October 9, 2026

‒Unreported Opinion‒
Following a 1993 jury trial in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, Robert
Andrew Reed, appellant, was convicted by a jury of second-degree sexual offense and
battery. This Court affirmed the judgments in an unreported opinion. Reed v. State, No.
702, Sept. Term 1993 (filed Mar. 11, 1994). In November 2025, appellant filed a “Motion
for Relief from Judgment” pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4), claiming
that because there “was never any sworn affidavit from any victim or witness[,]” the
prosecutor committed a fraud upon the court and the court lacked subject matter
jurisdiction. The court denied the motion without a hearing. This appeal followed.
On appeal, appellant contends that the court erred in denying the motion for relief
from judgment. 	The State disagrees and has also moved to dismiss the appeal as not
allowed by law. 	For the reasons that follow, we shall grant the motion to dismiss the
appeal.
Appellant cites to no authority authorizing the motion he filed in the circuit court.
And we are aware of none. For that reason alone, the circuit court did not err in denying
appellant’s motion. 	Moreover, in our view, appellant is not entitled to pursue a direct
appeal from a proceeding unauthorized by law. “In Maryland, criminal defendants do not
have a constitutional right to appeal. Instead, the right to seek appellate review is statutory;
the Legislature can provide for, or preclude, it.” Douglas v. State, 423 Md. 156, 170 (2011)
(cleaned up). Section 12-301 of the Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article provides, with
exceptions not here pertinent, that “a party may appeal from a final judgment entered in a
civil or criminal case by a circuit court.” “A final judgment is one that either determines
and concludes the rights of the parties involved or denies a party the means to prosecute or

‒Unreported Opinion‒
2
defend his or her rights and interests in the subject matter of the proceeding.” 	Douglas,
423 Md. at 171 (cleaned up).
The motion appellant filed in this case is not recognized by law in a criminal case.
Its denial, therefore, does not constitute a final judgment and is not, therefore, appealable.
If we were to hold that the denial of this motion was appealable, then litigants who invent
their own method of litigation unauthorized by law would then create for themselves
greater appellate rights than litigants who follow extant law and procedure. 	That cannot
be the law. Consequently, pursuant to Maryland Rule 8-602, we dismiss this appeal.
MOTION 	TO 	DISMISS 	APPEAL
GRANTED. COSTS TO BE PAID BY
APPELLANT.