Brice v. State

Murphy, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court. In the Criminal Court of Baltimore appellant filed a motion for removal on June 11, 1968. Pending indictments were transferred to the Circuit Court for Wicomico County. Claiming inability to receive a fair trial in that ■county, appellant, on September 20, 1968, again sought removal.

His motion was granted and the indictments were transferred back to Baltimore City. After his original trial and conviction of a capital offense in the Criminal Court of Baltimore was reversed and remanded for a new trial (Brice v. State, 254 Md. 655 ), appellant filed a request for removal; the request was heard and, again, the same pending indictments were transferred to the Circuit Court for Cecil County. On February 2, 1970, Judge H. Kenneth Mackey ordered the pending indictments returned to the Criminal Court of Baltimore. In defending the order returning the indictments to Baltimore City, the State propounds the following arguments: (1) Appellant was granted removal before and the law permits removal only once, Lee v. State, 164 Md. 550 ; (2) Appellant’s acquiescence to be tried in Baltimore City operates as a waiver of subsequent claims for removal ; (3) Appellant was not denied his right of removal by the Criminal Court of Baltimore because the order returning the indictments does not preclude further removal ; therefore, such order is not a final order.

The State’s main arguments — that appellant’s prior trial in Baltimore operates as consent to a later trial and that the law permits only one absolute right of removal (Lee v. State, supra) — misconceive the grounds upon which removal could be granted. Appellant Brice invoked a right of removal alleging, among other grounds, an inability to receive a fair trial in