Davis v. State, 501
| Decision Date | 23 January 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 501,501 |
| Citation | 261 A.2d 37,8 Md.App. 480 |
| Parties | Daniel DAVIS v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Leroy W. Carroll, Baltimore, for appellant.
Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., Charles E. Moylan, Jr., State's Atty. for Baltimore City, for appellee.
Before MURPHY, C. J., and ANDERSON, MORTON, ORTH and THOMPSON, JJ.
Appellant Davis, a former police officer, was indicted in Baltimore City and charged under a number of indictments with bribery, conspiracy, lottery and narcotics violations and malfeasance in office. Subsequently, the State filed a motion for a change of venue, alleging therein that the State could not obtain a fair trial in Baltimore City because of highly inflammatory and prejudicial newspaper publicity which aroused public indignation and incited public prejudice against the State's Attorney and Police Department of Baltimore City. The appellant answered the State's motion, contending that it was prematurely filed, that it was based on legally insufficient facts and, if granted, would deny him due process of law and his constitutional right to a speedy trial. After a hearing, the court, in a memorandum opinion, granted the State's motion and removed the case for trial to Howard County.
The appellant filed an immediate appeal to this court from the lower court's ruling granting the State's motion to change venue. In his order of appeal, appellant asserted it was based 'Upon the court's denial of the defendant's right to a speedy trial and for other reasons to be set forth in Defendant's brief.' While it does not appear that the lower court ever ruled on any motion filed by appellant for a speedy trial, the State moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the lower court's order was interlocutory in nature and did not constitute a final judgment from which an immediate appeal could be taken.
The State, as well as the defendant in a criminal case, is entitled to seek a change of venue, and the power of the court to order removal upon the State's application is well settled. See Maryland Constitution, Article 4, Section 8; Maryland Code, Article 75, Section 44; Maryland Rule 738; McMillan v. State, 68 Md. 307, 12 A. 8; State v. Brown, 295 F.Supp. 63 (D.C.Md.). The question before us is not whether the lower court abused its discretion in granting the State's motion for change of venue; rather, it is whether the order of the lower court granting the motion is immediately...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Lohss
...5, § 12; Rule 1035; Raimondi v. State, 8 Md.App. 468, 470, 261 A.2d 40. See Powers v. State, 8 Md.App. 487, 261 A.2d 44; Davis v. State, 8 Md.App. 480, 261 A.2d 37; Dodson v. State, 8 Md.App. 478, 261 A.2d 38; Pearce v. State, 8 Md.App. 477, 261 A.2d 39. Compare Westmoreland v. State, 8 Md.......
-
Neal v. State
...Md.App. 478, 261 A.2d 38 . . . (1970); from the granting of the State's motion in a noncapital case for a change of venue, Davis v. State, 8 Md.App. 480, 261 A.2d 37 . . . (1970); from refusal to grant a motion to dismiss an indictment on the ground that the State's witnesses had made pretr......
-
Raimondi v. State
...Term, 1969 (filed Jan. 23, 1970); from the granting of the State's motion in a non-capital case for a change of venue, Davis v. State, Md.App., 261 A.2d 37, September Term, 1969 (filed Jan. 23, 1970); from refusal to grant a motion to dismiss an indictment on the ground that the State's wit......
-
Chadderton v. State
...Piracci v. State, 207 Md. 499, 508, 115 A.2d 262 (1955); Jones v. State, 185 Md. 481, 485, 45 A.2d 350 (1946); Davis v. State, 8 Md.App. 480, 481, 261 A.2d 37 (1970). Appellant further contends that "[b]ecause there is no rational basis for placing those in Appellant's class at a special di......