Boblit v. State

⁴⁵⁶ HbndErson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. These separate appeals in one record are from judgments and death sentences passed after convictions of first degree murder, in cases tried separately. It is conceded that Brady and Boblit lay in wait for the victim, William Brooks, placing a log across his private driveway, in order to obtain possession of his car and money. Boblit was armed with a shotgun and Brady with a pistol.

When Brooks got out of his car, Boblit struck him in the head with the barrel of the shotgun. They placed Brooks in the car, and after driving a certain distance, they carried Brooks into the woods, where one of them throttled him with Boblit’s shirt. Each claimed that the other had actually strangled Mr. Brooks. They concealed the body, and divided the contents of Brooks’ pocketbook containing some $250.

They abandoned the car near Lynchburg, Virginia. Boblit went home, Brady fled to Florida. The sole contention raised on behalf of Brady is that his confession was obtained by force, or promise of reward. Brady made two confessions to the F.B.I. in Florida which were admitted in evidence without objection.

When picked up by the Anne Arundel County police, he showed them where the car and articles of bloody clothing had been abandoned in Virginia. Brady was taken to Ferndale Police Station about 7:30 P. M. on July 8, and gave the statement objected to the following morning about 10:30 A. M., July 9. It is conceded that he was not mistreated in any way. Cf.

White v. State, 201 Md. 489, 491 , and cases cited. Moreover, Brady took the stand and admitted virtually everything set forth in his confessions. Cf. Chisley v. State, 202 Md. 87 , 104 and Daniels v. State, 213 Md. 90, 106 .

Brady testified at one point that he was told, in effect, that if he confessed the