Bradley v. State

Collins, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal by Henry Bradley from a judgment and sentence for violation of the lottery laws in a trial before the trial judge without a jury. ³⁹⁵ The appellant was driving his automobile on Henrietta Street in Baltimore City on August 21, 1952, about 12:45 P.M. Officer Charles Stephan, a foot patrolman who had previously served on the Vice Squad and was familiar with lotteries, was patrolling his beat near the intersection of Henrietta and Howard Streets. He testified as follows: At that time he observed an automobile driven by the appellant making a right hand turn from Sharp Street into Henrietta Street. He stopped the car and told the appellant he was driving on the wrong side of the street.

Appellant, having stopped his car, backed up so he was then on the proper side. Officer Ernest Shephard, another foot patrolman, then arrived at the scene. Officer Stephan then told appellant: “You were driving on the wrong side of the street. You didn’t pay any attention to the intersection at Plum Alley.” Appellant seemed very nervous and opened the car door and put his foot on the frame of the car.

Officer Stephan then said to him: “Let me see your cards.” Appellant got out of the car, reached in his right hand pocket and pulled out a white handkerchief, his registration card, and his driver’s license. As he handed these cards to Officer Stephan a white paper fell to the ground. Officer Shephard, who was standing back of appellant, picked up the paper and looked at it. Officer Stephan looked at the registration card and driver’s license and Officer Shephard handed him the paper which Officer Stephan identified as “adding machine lottery tapes.” Officer Stephan asked appellant why he dropped the tapes, to which he replied that the tapes were not his and he did not know how they got on the ground.

The officers then placed appellant under arrest and drove him to the Southern Police Station. He was there searched by the turnkey and sixteen money wrappers and $3.00 in cash were found on him. Lieutenant Dickerson then said to appellant: “These are lottery tapes? What were you doing with them?” Appellant replied: “I just had them on me at the wrong time.” At the police station he was charged with the lottery violation and ³⁹⁶ with'driving on the wrong side of the- street.

Officer Stephan said appellant was actually charged with the lottery first because-he did-not have the timé then-to write out the traffic summons. ■ The appellant was found not guilty of the traffic violation before Magistrate Levinson. Officer Stephan denied that he removed the -lottery tapes from appellant’s pocket. Officer Shephard- testified that he heard Officer- Stephan accuse-the appellant of driving-on the wrong: side of the street and then saw Officer Stephan standing beside the- car. When he arrived Officer Stephan was asking the- appellant for his registration card - and driver’s license.

Appellant reached- into his right -hand pofekét. As he did so-he withdrew a-handkerchief and two cards and slips of paper- fell to the ground. Officer Shephard stooped-down and picked up the papers and handed them tó Officer Stephan.' Officer Stephan said: ‘-‘Shep, they are lottéry tapes.” Officer- Shephard said he had never •had any previous -knowledge or expérience in lottery -cases. Appellant dénied that the ■ tapes belonged to him.

Officer. Shephard confirmed the statement made -to Lieutenant Dickerson by the appellant. Sarah Mércer, for the appellant, testified that -she saw Henry Bradley driving the car on this particular occasion and that the entire vehicle was being 'operated on the right side of the street; She did not see the officer when he first stopped the appellant but saw them talking together. She said she did not know what the officer was saying to Bradley because she was too far away to hear but she noticed the appellant walk to the front of the car and turn around.

Another' officer (Officer Shephard) then came on the scene and searched Bradley and patted his pockets. She said: “As I remember he went into Mr. Bradley’s right Land pants pocket.” She could not see what he took from the pocket. He did také; something “because he looked' at it.” • She did not see anything fall from appellant’s-pocket. During all of this time