Banks v. State

Pjír Curiam. Appellant, William Eugene Banks, was indicted on two counts charging larceny of an automobile and unauthorized use. He was tried by a jury on November 22, 1966, in the Circuit Court for Cecil County before Judge Edward D. E. Rollins. Appellant was convicted of unauthorized use and sentenced to confinement for an indeterminate period not to exceed three years in the Maryland Correctional Institution, Hagerstown.

He now appeals from that conviction. The appellant raises two contentions on appeal: 1) That the trial court erred when it refused a directed verdict as moved by defendant at the close of the State’s case and at the close of the entire case. 2) At the oral argument he raised the further contention that the crime charged was not committed in Maryland and the Courts of Maryland have no jurisdiction. On May 18, 1966, David Gilchrist Crowley parked his car on the Bainbridge Parking lot at approximately 7 p.m. The vehicle was in good condition, the ignition undamaged, he retained his keys and had not given permission for anyone to use his car.

At approximately 12 :Q0 a.m. on May 19, 1966, appellant claims that he was picked up by co-defendant Brown and an inebriated sailor. The sailor was let out at Bainbridge and Banks and Brown headed for York, Pennsylvania. Banks purchased gas in Maryland and took over driving in Red Lion, Pennsylvania. Banks had been told the car belonged to an unnamed friend of Brown.

There was evidence that shortly after 2:00 a.m., the police at Spring Garden Township, which is next to York, Pennsylvania, observed appellant operating the vehicle; appellant identified himself to police, but could not inform police of the owner’s identity. Officer Arnold testified that a subsequent investigation revealed the ignition switch punched out and the wires dangling. Arnold testified that Banks turned off ³⁷⁶ the engine, but that is denied by Banks. Both defendants voluntarily accompanied the police.

Appellant’s first contention goes to the sufficiency of the evidence. In a trial before a jury this Court can review the sufficiency of the evidence, but this Court does not inquire into and measure the weight of the evidence, but only determines whether there is any relevant evidence which could properly sustain a conviction. Graef v. State, 1 Md. App. 161 (1967) ; Borman v. State, 1 Md. App. 276 (1967) ; Culver v. State, 1 Md. App. 406 (1967). Under Maryland Code, Article 27, § 349 (1957), it is a misdemeanor for any person, his aiders or abettors, to take and carry away out of the custody or use of any other person any