HEADNOTE: Mario Rodriguez Gutierrez v. State of Maryland, No. 98 ...

State’s theory of the case was that the shooting was motivated by Bryant’s anger that
Houston and Frazier were not “folks.” See id. at 918. Bryant, on the other hand, argued
“that the State’s sole purpose in seeking to admit [the detective’s testimony] was to inflame
the prejudices of the jury in an effort to convict [Bryant].” Id. at 920. The appellate court
sided with the State, holding that “[e]vidence indicating a defendant was . . . involved in
gang-related activity is admissible . . . to offer a motive for an otherwise inexplicable act,
provided there is sufficient proof that such . . . activity is related to the crime charged.” Id.
at 920 (emphasis added). It determined that “there was sufficient evidence to support the
State’s theory that the seemingly inexplicable attack on the deceased was gang related” and
that the trial court “allowed in only as much gang testimony as was necessary to establish this
motive.” Id. at 920–21.
In Maryland, the Court of Special Appeals has permitted gang expert testimony where
fact evidence showed that the crime was motivated by gang affiliation. See Ayala, 174 Md.
App. at 664–66, 923 A.2d at 962–63. In Ayala, this fact evidence came in the form of two
pretrial statements, the contents of which were admitted at trial, in which Ayala said that he
was a member of MS-13, that the victim had claimed to be a member of the 18th Street Gang,
and that Ayala had previously been beaten by a member of the 18th Street Gang and still had
a cut on his forehead from the fight. See id. at 653–54, 923 A.2d at 955–56. The State’s
theory was that Ayala killed the victim because he believed, albeit mistakenly, that the victim
was a member of a rival gang. See id. at 651–52, 923 A.2d at 954. The trial court permitted
a Fairfax County detective to testify as to the meaning of the name MS-13, including its link
15