Maryland case law › David v. State

David v. State

1 Md. App. 666 (1967) · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Court of Special Appeals of MarylandDisposition: AffirmedPer Curiam✓ Good law
HoldingJohn David was convicted in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, sitting without a jury, under two indictments charging him, inter alia, with receiving stolen goods.

PgR Curiam. Appellant, John David, was found guilty by Judge Meyer M. Cardin, sitting without a jury, in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, under two indictments charging him, inter alia, with receiving stolen goods. He was sentenced to serve a term of ten years and a term of eighteen months, said sentences to run concurrently in the Maryland Penitentiary. He now appeals from his two convictions asserting that the evidence which served as a basis for these convictions was inadmissible in that his arrest and the subsequent search and seizure were illegal.

At the trial it was stipulated that the homes of Stanley Langbaum and Isadore Levin located in Baltimore City were broken and entered on September 7, 1966 and April 23, 1966, respectively, and that certain items were stolen therefrom which were collectively marked as State’s Exhibits I and II. The facts and circumstances that gave rise to the appellant’s arrest for these crimes could have been found by the trier of fact from the testimony to be these: On September 7, 1966, at approximately 10 :45 p.m., Officer Donald Worden of the Northwest Police District in Baltimore City, observed the appellant acting in a suspicious manner after seeing the patrol car. The appellant, who was carrying a suitcase, turned his head from side to side, kept looking back at the patrol car, then quickened his pace and went into a store. Officer Worden followed him and observed that the appellant, who was 66 years old, had two City College school rings and was carrying a pair of gloves in his pocket.

Pie also noticed that the appellant was perspiring heavily and appeared to be nervous. At the lunch counter within the store, the appellant dropped an identification bracelet on the floor with the name of Gerald Langbaum inscribed on it. The officer picked it up, returned it to the appellant and asked him his name. When he replied that it was John David, the officer told the appellant that he would like to talk with him outside.

When they arrived out 669 side, the appellant was asked what he was carrying in the suitcase and he replied that he had a radio and a floodlight which he used for a church. At this time a call came over the patrol car radio with respect to a breaking and entering at 5919 Bland Avenue, approximately 4)4 blocks away. Officer Worden left to investigate and the appellant remained standing on the

This is a preview of David v. State. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.