Covington v. State
Decision Date | 13 January 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 352,352 |
Citation | 34 Md.App. 454,367 A.2d 974 |
Parties | Quenzill COVINGTON v. STATE of Maryland. |
Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Bradford C. Peabody, Assigned Public Defender, Baltimore, with whom were Alan H. Murrell, Public Defender and Geraldine Kenney Sweeney Arnold M. Zerwitz, Asst. Public Defenders, Baltimore, on the brief for appellant.
Bernard A. Raum, Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom were Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., William A. Swisher, State's Atty. for Baltimore City and Howard Grossfeld, Asst. State's Atty. for Baltimore City, on the brief for appellee.
Argued before THOMPSON, POWERS and LOWE, JJ.
Reargued before GILBERT, C. J., and MORTON and THOMPSON, MOYLAN, and POWERS, MENCHINE, DAVIDSON, MOORE, LOWE, MELVIN, MASON and LISS, JJ.
The plea of not guilty, accompanied by an 'Agreed Statement of Facts', is a peculiar animal. As was succinctly stated in Barnes v. State, 31 Md.App. 25, 35, 354 A.2d 499, 505 (1976),
The trial below proceeded on such an agreed statement of facts. The defendant, Quenzill Covington, appellant here, was found guilty by the trial judge and sentenced to eight years, to run concurrently with another sentence (of four years) that he was then serving.
He makes the following contention on appeal:
'The court below erred in finding Appellant guilty without first affording Appellant the right to argue the merits of his case.'
In support of this contention, Covington, asserts that the lack of argument by his counsel, after the evidence was admitted prior to the Court's finding of guilty, denied him his right to counsel in violation of the precepts of Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 95 S.Ct. 2550, 45 L.Ed.2d 593 (1975); Yopps v. State, 228 Md. 204, 178 A.2d 879 (1962); and Moore v. State, 7 Md.App. 330, 254 A.2d 717 (1969).
The detective would testify that on May 15, 1975 he received a phone call from an informant concerning some narcotics that could be purchased at Greenmount and North Avenue section of Baltimore City. At approximately 4 p. m. that day the detective met his informant at North Avenue and Greenmount Avenue in Baltimore City at which time the informant then took him over to meet the defendant seated at the trial table who the detective would identify. At that time the informant introduced the detective to the defendant. Upon having a conversation, the detective was able to reach an agreement with the defendant where he would buy 25 bags of heroin or a bundle for the price of $125 at approximately 4:30 p. m., the detective, along with the defendant went to 107 Albemarle Street-Apartment 7F. The detective took him into-107 Albemarle Street. At approximately 5 o'clock when they arrived to this particular location and in that apartment, the defendant then handed over to the officer 25 glassine bags containing a white powdery substance which the detective believed to be heroin. The detective then left that particular location.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Smith
...Statement of Facts,’ is a peculiar animal." Covington v. State , 282 Md. 540, 541, 386 A.2d 336 (1978) (quoting Covington v. State , 34 Md. App. 454, 455, 367 A.2d 974 (1977) ). "Under an agreed statement of facts both [the] State and the defense agree as to the ultimate facts.... The trier......
-
Kohr v. State
...court. As the Court of Appeals said in the recent case of Covington v. State, Md., 386 A.2d 336 (filed May 22, 1978), Aff'g, 34 Md.App. 454, 367 A.2d 974 (1977): "Covington's proper remedy is under the Maryland version of the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, Maryland Code (1957, 1976 ......
-
Covington v. State
...ORTH, JJ. Reargued before MURPHY, C. J., and SMITH, DIGGES, LEVINE, ELDRIDGE, ORTH and COLE, JJ. SMITH, Judge. In Covington v. State, 34 Md.App. 454, 367 A.2d 974 (1977), the Court of Special Appeals held that appellant, Quenzill Covington (Covington), failed to preserve for appellate revie......
-
State v. Smith
...by an 'Agreed Statement of Facts,' is a peculiar animal." Covington v. State, 282 Md. 540, 541 (1978) (quoting Covington v. State, 34 Md. App. 454, 455 (1977)). "Under an agreed statement of facts both [the] State and the defense agree as to the ultimate facts. . . . The trier of fact is no......