Curry v. State, 306
| Citation | 235 Md. 378,201 A.2d 792 |
| Decision Date | 02 July 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 306,306 |
| Parties | Larry Zane CURRY v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Maryland |
Eugene Wm. Pierelli, Baltimore, for appellant.
Robert F. Sweeney, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Thomas B. Finan, Atty. Gen., William J. O'Donnell and David T. Mason, State's Atty. and Asst. State's Atty., respectively, for Baltimore City, on the brief), all of Baltimore, for appellee.
Before BRUNE, C. J., and HAMMOND, HORNEY, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.
The appellant Curry and one Tingler (who did not appeal) were arrested on a charge of the larceny of an automobile. They were tried on an indictment charging that offense and also unauthorized use of an automobile. After a trial before the court, sitting without a jury, they were acquitted of larceny and were found guilty of unauthorized use. Curry claims that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction largely because a principal witness for the State, one Hawse, had a grudge against him. He also claims that his arrest was illegal
The fact that Hawse had a grudge against Curry was clearly shown, and Hawse admitted having said that he would like to see Curry go to jail. Hawse's testimony is conflicting as to whether the incident which gave rise to this statement occurred the evening before or the day of Curry's arrest. The former seems more probable, as Curry was held in custody for several days after his arrest, which occurred at about 10:30 A.M. on April 17, 1963.
In summarizing the evidence Judge Grady pointed out that a white, 1959 Chevrolet automobile belonging to one Spring was missing from the area of Spring's home at 2 A.M. on April 17th, that at about 7 A.M. that day Curry pointed out a light colored Chevrolet car as his, though at that point it was not identified as Spring's automobile. Judge Grady then continued:
car, and that thereafter, within 10 or 15 minutes, the two Defendants in this case, Curry and Tingler, were apprehended within two or two and a half blocks from where the car was recovered by the police officer.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Foster v. State
...only to the weight of the evidence of resolution by the trier of fact. Myers v. State, 237 Md. 632, 206 A.2d 704 (1965); Curry v. State, 235 Md. 378, 201 A.2d 792 (1964); Wiggins v. State, 235 Md. 97, 200 A.2d 683 (1964).15 The terms 'unnecessarily suggestive' as used in Stovall v. Denno, 3......
-
Molter v. State
...496 (1962); Cason v. State, 230 Md. 356, 358, 187 A.2d 103 (1963); Brooks v. State, 235 Md. 23, 200 A.2d 177 (1964); Curry v. State, 235 Md. 378, 201 A.2d 792 (1964); McCray v. State, 236 Md. 9, 202 A.2d 320 (1964); Bey v. State, 237 Md. 627, 206 A.2d 559 (1965); Anglin v. State, 244 Md. 65......
-
In re Landon G.
...unlawfully taken.” Anello, 201 Md. at 168, 93 A.2d 71;Johnson, 2 Md.App. at 491, 236 A.2d 41 (same). Similarly, in Curry v. State, 235 Md. 378, 381, 201 A.2d 792 (1964), cert. denied,379 U.S. 1004, 85 S.Ct. 729, 13 L.Ed.2d 705 (1965), the Court upheld the trial judge's finding that “ ‘these......
-
In re Melvin M.
...jumped out of car and fled upon being approached by the police.) Here, the juvenile court relied on the Court of Appeals decision in Curry v. State, supra, to apply the theft inference regarding exclusive possession of recently stolen goods and to convict appellant of theft. In that case, f......