Clark v. State

Irving, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The motion of the Attorney-General to dismiss this-appeal must prevail. The 28th rule of this Court provides that in criminal cases “ the appeal or writ of error-allowed by law, shall be taken without delay, and the transcript of the record shall forthwith, or as soon as the same can be made out, he transmitted to the Court of’ Appeals.” In the case of the State vs. Bowers, 65 Md., 363 , the writ of error was sued out twenty-one days after-judgment rendered, and this Court said the same was not sued out without delay as provided by the rule and the writ was'dismissed. In that case the Court says that, “what will amount to delay within the rule must be determined by the character of each case as it arises.

A longer time will be allowed where the exceptions are numerous, or 'where the case is such that time is required for preparing the petition or writ of error.” But in a simple case like that was, the delay indulged was “ unquestionably an infraction of the rule.” The same ruling was followed in State vs. Long, 65 Md., 365 , where there was a delay of over thirty days. We see nothing in this case to relieve it from the requirements of the rule and the construction given to it in the decisions cited. The verdict was rendered on the 21st day of June, 1887, yet the record was not transmitted to this ¹⁸³ Court until the twenty-fourth day of October following, more than four months after verdict rendered. By the docket entries the exceptions are noted as taken on the twenty-first day of June, and the appeal prayed and affidavit that it was not taken for delay is entered as of the same day.

Now assuming the record in