Maryland case law › Bagley v. State

Bagley v. State

6 Md. App. 375 (1969) · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Court of Special Appeals of MarylandDisposition: Affirmed✓ Good law
HoldingGene Howard Bagley was convicted of second-degree murder in the Criminal Court of Baltimore by Judge Meyer M.

Per Curiam. The appellant, Gene Howard Bagley, a/k/a James Howard Bagley, a/k/a James William Stewart, was convicted of murder in the second degree in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, by Judge Meyer M. Cardin, sitting without a jury. He was sentenced to ten years under the jurisdiction of the Department of Correction. The only question presented in this appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to convict. 377 It was stipulated and agreed at trial that the autopsy record be introduced.

That record showed that the deceased, Willis Edmunds, died of multiple gunshot wounds and massive internal hemorrhage. Officer Harold Sanders, of the Baltimore City Police Department, testified that at about 11:20 p.m. on January 3, 1967, he and another officer were on foot patrol when they heard three gunshots. A patrol car and two other officers were at the curb by Officer Sanders. All of the officers moved in the direction of the shots and the officers in the patrol car quickly pulled up to the corner of Abbott and Bond Streets where they grabbed the appellant.

Officer Sanders went around the corner to Ashland Avenue and Dallas Street where he found the body of the deceased. Officer Robert Cohen testified that he was standing with Officers Sanders, Warfield, and Grander when he heard three quick shots from the vicinity of Ashland and Bond Street. He immediately got into the patrol car, which proceeded south on Bond Street. At Bond Street near Abbott Street he observed a man running out of a three foot alley behind the restaurant at Ash-land and Bond Street.

Officer Cohen got out of the car and when the man saw Cohen he stopped running and just walked. The man put his hand in his left pocket and pulled out a metallic object. When Cohen drew closer he observed that the object was a gun. He shouted to Officer Grander to “watch it, he’s got a gun.” Officer Grander got out of the car and the man dropped the object.

The man was placed under arrest. Officer Cohen said to him, “Where did you get the gun?”, and the man replied, “What gun, I didn’t have a gun, I want a lawyer.” Officer Cohen stated that the exact location of the arrest was about 1% blocks from the body of the deceased, and that he saw the man run out of the alley approximately one minute after the shots were fired. Officer Cohen identified the appellant as the man whom he had seen that night. He also identified the gun as that retrieved by another officer from the street and stated that it was the only gun on the street.

He was unable to identify the gun as that which the appellant had in his hand. Officer Frank Grander, Jr., testified that he heard the shots, and with Officers Warfield and Cohen proceeded in the patrol car 378 south on Bond Street, and saw a man run out from a three foot alleyway located just north of Ashland Avenue on Bond Street. The spot where the man emerged from the alley was about 75 feet down the alley from the body of the deceased. Officers Grunder and Cohen approached the man and when they were three feet away the man took his hand from his pocket.

Officer Cohen said, “He has a gun.” Officer Grunder grabbed the man’s hands and in wrestling with him saw a small automatic pistol in his left hand. In wrestling with the man the gun went into the gutter of the street and was later recovered by Officer Grunder. Officer Grunder identified the appellant as the man involved and identified the gun, a .25 caliber automatic pistol, as the one which he recovered. Officer Grunder also identified pictures showing three empty cartridge cases lying on the sidewalk near the deceased, stated that he had taken the empty cartridge cases recovered from the sidewalk near the deceased as well as the pistol and two unexpended cartridges removed from the pistol to the crime laboratory.

Sergeant Charles D. Knight,

This is a preview of Bagley v. State. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.