Bury v. State

Per Curiam. The Appellant, David Edward Bury, was convicted of storehouse breaking by the Honorable James K. Cullen, sitting in the Criminal Court of Baltimore without a jury, and sentenced to two years in the Maryland House of Correction. The record indicates that at approximately 10:30 P.M. on August 7, 1966, Miss Shirley A. Huffman heard a noise outside her third floor apartment in the 2400 block of North Charles Street in Baltimore City. From her window Miss Huffman observed a light-colored Chevrolet parked in front of 2414 North Charles Street with someone in the front seat and another person walking toward the car.

Approximately ten or fifteen minutes later, she saw two boys standing beside the same light-colored Chevrolet. After one of the boys had apparently noticed her, she saw them walk up the street with the automobile being driven slowly behind them. The two boys then en ⁶⁷⁶ tered the vehicle and drove off. Some time later, Miss Huffman heard glass breaking and, upon looking out her window, she observed two boys loading office machines into the trunk of the same light-colored Chevrolet.

Miss Huffman then secured the license, number of the automobile and notified the police. The. record further indicates that, as a result of a radio dispatch, Officer Robert Rubin of the Baltimore City Police Department stopped the subject light-colored Chevrolet in the 2400 block of East Monument Street at approximately 3:30 A.M. on August, 8, 1966. At that time the vehicle was being operated by a co-defendant, Leonard F. Gittings, while the Appellant and another co-defendant Frederick O. Theiss, were passengers. Without any objection from the occupants of the car, the Officer searched the car and found several business machines in the trunk.

During the trial it was stipulated that on August 7, 1966, the premises of the Burgling Business Machines Co., Inc. in the 2400 block of North Charles Street were broken into and certain business machines, valued at $105.90, were taken therefrom. It was further stipulated that the machines taken from Burgling were the machines found in the trunk of the car in which the Appellant was riding. In her testimony, Miss Huffman stated that there were three white males involved, but she could not identify the Appellant as one of those persons. The Appellant took the stand and testified that he had been with his girl friend on the night in question; that he was at home reading a book when his co-defendants came to his house shortly after. 3:00 A.M. to use his bathroom, at which time he went with them to get something to eat.

He also testified that he was unaware of the contents in the trunk of the automobile. The Appellant’s alibi was corroborated by Miss Kathleen Zaras who testified that he was in her company from 9:00 P.M. until 1:45 A.M. on the evening of the crime. In this appeal, the Appellant contends that the identification, in particular, and the evidence, in general, were cumulatively insufficient to support the lower court’s finding of guilt. Since the instant case was tried by the lower court without a jury, this Court may review