Hamilton and Fletcher v. State

Finan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This case involving the charge of grand larceny of which both appellants stand convicted, and for which ²⁵⁷ Fletcher was sentenced to a term of 10 years and Hamilton to a term of 8 years, has been before the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland on two occasions, Fletcher v. State, 8 Md. App. 153 , 258 A. 2d 781 (1969); and Hamilton and Fletcher v. State, 12 Md. App. 91 , 277 A. 2d 460 (1971). It is from the decision in the last mentioned case that certiorari has been granted. Although the appellants raise an issue concerning an alleged variance between the named owner in the indictment and the corporate owner disclosed in the testimony before the lower court and another issue concerning the trial judge’s instruction to the jury relative to their role as judge of both the law and the facts (Constitution of Maryland, Article XV, Section 5), these issues do not trouble us.

We are of the opinion that they are without merit and were ably disposed of below by Judge Moylan writing for the Court of Special Appeals in Hamilton and Fletcher v. State, supra. We do believe, however, that the issue raised by the appellants, as to whether their conviction for larceny in Maryland based on their transportation of stolen money into this State from the District of Columbia, on the “continuing larceny” theory, constituted double jeopardy in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, should be the subject of review by this Court. In order to assess the actions of the appellants with relation to “continuing larceny,” we must view them within the framework of events which occurred following the larceny in the District of Columbia. For this purpose we set forth certain pertinent facts as narrated in the opinion of the Court of Special Appeals. “The grand larceny of which the appellants were here convicted arose out of an armed bank robbery perpetrated by these appellants and two others upon the Highland’s Branch of the National Capital Bank of Washington on October 22, 1968.

The branch was located in the Dis ²⁵⁸ trict of Columbia. The armed robbery occurred at approximately 1 p.m. The appellant Fletcher was identified as having participated in that holdup. A red automobile bearing Maryland license tags DY 6318 was identified as leaving the scene shortly after the robbery occurred.

Approximately thirty minutes later, as a result of police radio broadcasts, a red automobile bearing Maryland license tags DY 6318 was halted by a police roadblock near Randolph Village in Prince George’s County. A number of gunshots were exchanged between the police and the occupants of the automobile. The appellants Hamilton and Fletcher were occupying the automobile at the time it was stopped, along with their co-defendant Nichols. Eighteen thousand dollars was recovered from the vehicle.

An additional $19,000 was recovered from the person of the appellant Fletcher.” 12 Md. App. at 93 . Unquestionably, a split of