Brady v. State, 14
| Citation | 154 A.2d 434,220 Md. 454 |
| Decision Date | 24 September 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 14,14 |
| Parties | John L. BRADY and Charles Donald Boblit v. STATE of Maryland. * |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Maryland |
George B. Woelfel, Annapolis, for appellant John L. Brady, by Morris Turk, Annapolis (Louis M. Strauss, Annapolis, on the brief), for appellant Charles Donald Boblit.
Stedman Prescott, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen. (C. Ferdinand Sybert, Atty. Gen., and C. Osborne Duvall, State's Atty, for Anne Arundel County, Annapolis, on the brief), for appellee.
Before BRUNE, C. J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.
These separate appeals in one record are from judgments and death sentences passed after convictions of first degree murder, in cases tried separately. It is conceded that Brady and Boblit lay in wait for the victim, William Brooks, placing a log across his private driveway, in order to obtain possession of his car and money. Boblit was armed with a shotgun and Brady with a pistol. When Brooks got out of his car, Boblit struck him in the head with the barrel of the shotgun. They placed Brooks in the car, and after driving a certain distance, they carried Brooks into the woods, where one of them throttled him with Boblit's shirt. Each claimed that the other had actually strangled Mr. Brooks. They concealed the body, and divided the contents of Brooks' pocketbook containing some $250. They abandoned the car near Lynchburg, Virginia. Boblit went home, Brady fled to Florida.
The sole contention raised on behalf of Brady is that his confession was obtained by force, or promise of reward. Brady made two confessions to the F.B.I. in Florida which were admitted in evidence without objection. When picked up by the Anne Arundel County police, he showed them where the car and articles of bloody clothing had been abandoned in Virginia. Brady was taken to Ferndale Police Station about 7:30 P.M. on July 8, and gave the statement objected to the following morning about 10:30 A.M., July 9. It is conceded that he was not mistreated in any way. Cf. White v. State, 201 Md. 489, 491, 94 A.2d 447, and cases cited. Moreover, Brady took the stand and admitted virtually everything set forth in his confessions. Cf. Chisley v. State, 202 Md. 87, 104, 95 A.2d 577 and Daniels v. State, 213 Md. 90, 106, 131 A.2d 267.
Brady testified at one point that he was told, in effect, that if he confessed the police would release his girl friend who was being held as a witness. If we assume, without deciding, that this would render the confession inadmissible, it is sufficient to say that all of the police and other officials categorically denied that any such promise or statement was made. We cannot find that the trial judge was in error in accepting this version of what occurred. Cf. Peters and Demby v. State, 187 Md. 7, 15, 48 A.2d 586.
Boblit contends that he should not have been found guilty of first degree murder, because according to his version, he did not actively assist Brady in strangling the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Erbe v. State
...first degree and sentenced to death. The convictions were affirmed by this Court in Boblit v. State, 220 Md. 454, sub. nom. Brady v. State, 154 A.2d 434 (1959). Brady instituted a proceeding under the Post Conviction Procedure Act which reached this Court in Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422, 174......
-
Campbell v. State
... Page 438 ... 293 Md. 438 ... 444 A.2d 1034 ... Anthony Wilson CAMPBELL ... STATE of Maryland ... Court of Appeals of Maryland ... May 14, 1982 ... [444 A.2d 1035] ... Page 439 ... Victoria S. Keating, Asst. Public Defender, Baltimore (Alan H. Murrell, Public ... 886, 84 S.Ct. 160, 11 L.Ed.2d 115 (1963); Boblit v. State, 220 Md. 454, 457, 154 A.2d 434, 435 (1959), appeal dismissed sub nom. Brady v. State, 222 Md. 442, 160 A.2d 912 (1960); Shockley v. State, 218 Md. 491, 497, 148 A.2d 371, 374 (1959); see Veney v. State, 251 Md. 159, 174, ... ...
-
United States v. Agurs
...74 Yale L.J. 136 (1964); and Comment, Brady v. Maryland and The Prosecutor's Duty to Disclose, 40 U.Chi.L.Rev. 112 (1972). 11 220 Md. 454, 154 A.2d 434 (1959). 12 226 Md. 422, 174 A.2d 167 (1961). 13 "The petitioner was denied due process of law by the State's suppression of evidence before......
-
Roary v. State
... ... LaFave, Substantive Criminal Law § 14.5 (2nd ed. 2003). The modern felony-murder rule is "intended to deter dangerous conduct by punishing as murder a homicide resulting from dangerous ... denied, 375 U.S. 886, 84 S.Ct. 160, 11 L.Ed.2d 115 (1963); Boblit v. State, 220 Md. 454, 457, 154 A.2d 434, 435 (1959) ; Brady v. State, 222 Md. 442, 160 A.2d 912 (1960) ; Shockley v. State, 218 Md. 491, 497, 148 A.2d 371, 374 (1959) ). Campbell involved the question of ... ...