Carroll v. State

Per Curiam. Appellant, Daniel W. Carroll, Jr., complains of his convictions of robbery with a deadly weapon, assault with intent to murder and carrying a deadly weapon by a jury in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, Judge J. Harold Grady, presiding. Appellant was sentenced to twenty years, fifteen years, and two years, respectively, on the above convictions, all sentences to run concurrently. On appeal, the appellant raises two contentions: 1.

That the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. 2. That the lower court committed reversible error in allowing the testimony of Mrs. Hilda Wyatt to be heard by the jury. On December 16, 1965, at approximately 9:15 p.m.. Miss Flora Startt, a Librarian at the Enoch Pratt Library, was returning home from work when, after posting a card at the corner mailbox, she was seized by the neck and choked.

The ensuing struggle culminated in her being pushed to the ground and having a gun pressed into her right side and discharged. The resultant wound in her lower abdomen was very serious ⁵² and in addition to which she sustained bruises of the neck, legs and ankles. Her attacker was in front of her for “probably a few minutes.” At the conclusion of this vicious attack, her purse was stolen and the culprit fled. Miss Startt’s description of her assailant was a Negro male, hatless, wearing a brown army-type jacket, dark trousers, and with a thin face, closely cropped hair, about five feet six inches or shorter and probably between twenty-three and thirty years of age.

At the trial, Miss Startt identified the appellant as being her assailant. Miss Elizabeth Wayenick heard the noise of the scuffle but saw no one other than Miss Startt when she reached the scene. Officer Robert Novak of the Baltimore City Police Department received a call at approximately 9:30 p.m. on the same evening, whereupon he and Officer Becroft began cruising the area. After a time lapse of about one minute, Officer Novak from the description furnished him observed appellant in a car, followed same and pulled it to the curb.

After identifying appellant, who was wearing a dirty army-type jacket, dark pants, and no hat, and who was in an acúte stage of nervous agitation, Officer Novak arrested him. Mrs. Hilda Wyatt, the mother of a friend of the appellant, testified tliat having.seen appellant on the night of the commission of the crime, when he was brought to her home by police and had a discussion with her son, and her observation of him at the trial, that it was her opinion that, at the trial, the appellant appeared to weigh more and was “bigger all over.” In trial before a jury, this Court can review the sufficiency of the evidence, but this Court does not inquire into and measure the weight