Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Commonwealth of Maryland v. Wesley Cagle
Date: 08-05-2016
Case Number:
Judge: Wanda Keyes Herard
Court: Circuit Court, City of Baltimore, Maryland
Plaintiff's Attorney: Marilyn J. Mosby
Defendant's Attorney:
Chaz Ball
and
Joe Martha
Description:
Balitmore, MD - Baltimore Police Officer Convicted of Assault For Shooting Unarmed Man
The Commonwealth of Maryland charged Baltimore Police Officers Wesley Cagle, age 46, with, attempted first-degree and second degree attempted murder, first-degree assault and a handgun charge for shooting Michael Johansen in the groin as he lay in the doorway of an East Baltimore corner store after he had already been shot twice by two other officers.
Johansen, a drug addict, testified that he went to the store to "get some money."
The Commonwealth of Maryland charged Baltimore Police Officers Wesley Cagle, age 46, with, attempted first-degree and second degree attempted murder, first-degree assault and a handgun charge for shooting Michael Johansen in the groin as he lay in the doorway of an East Baltimore corner store after he had already been shot twice by two other officers.
Johansen, a drug addict, testified that he went to the store to "get some money."
Outcome:
Defendant was found guilty of first-degree assault and on the handgun charge.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Commonwealth of Maryland v. Wesley Cagle?
The outcome was: Defendant was found guilty of first-degree assault and on the handgun charge.
Which court heard Commonwealth of Maryland v. Wesley Cagle?
This case was heard in Circuit Court, City of Baltimore, Maryland, MD. The presiding judge was Wanda Keyes Herard.
Who were the attorneys in Commonwealth of Maryland v. Wesley Cagle?
Plaintiff's attorney: Marilyn J. Mosby. Defendant's attorney: Chaz Ball and Joe Martha.
When was Commonwealth of Maryland v. Wesley Cagle decided?
This case was decided on August 5, 2016.