Maryland case law › Lawrence v. State

Lawrence v. State

6 Md. App. 226 (1969) · Maryland Court of Special Appeals
Maryland Court of Special AppealsDisposition: AffirmedMorton, J.✓ Good law
HoldingThe appellants, Lawrence and Boyd, were convicted in a non-jury trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County of armed robbery of the White Way Tavern and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment.

Morton, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellants were convicted in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, in a non-jury trial, of armed robbery and sentenced to fifteen (15) years imprisonment. In this appeal, they contend that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain their convictions. From the record it appears that two men, one of whom wore a silk stocking over his face, entered the White Way Tavern about 1:00 p.m. on January 24, 1968, which was owned and operated by a husband and wife.

The individual wearing the stocking mask pointed a rifle at the wife, who had,come from the kitchen in the rear to wait on them, and advised her: /‘This is a holdup.” The wife ran screaming back into the kitchen. Her husband immediately came out and threw a chair at the men, whereupon one of them hit him on the side of the, head with a pistol, knocking him unconscious. The husband was left lying in a large pool of blood as the individuals proceeded to knock down several doors in the establishment while the wife was hiding in a bedroom. About this time, the .son of the owners arrived, begged the individuals not to further harm his father, and called the police as soon as they left the' building.

Between 1:15 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. the same day, an off-duty police officer heard on the police radio in his private car a “lookout” signal for two Negroes who were wanted in connection with the holdup of the White Way Tavern.-At the time, 229 he was in the car waiting to enter a stop sign intersection, and he noticed a foreign car with Delaware license plates immediately behind him occupied by three Negroes. At the same time, he observed a marked police car drive up behind the foreign car. He and the officer in the police car immediately approached the foreign car and found the appellant, Boyd, sitting in the seat behind the driver and the appellant, Lawrence, sitting next to the driver who was an individual named Martin. 1 When Martin was unable to produce a registration card and a radio check to police headquarters revealed that the Delaware tags were stolen, the three individuals were requested to get out of the car and placed under arrest. A search of the car, which was consented to by Martin, produced a loaded pistol, a pellet rifle, a hunting knife with a six inch blade, two full fifths of whiskey, one full pint of whiskey and one partially filled bottle of whiskey with a pouring spout.

These bottles of whiskey were positively identified by the wife as having come from the tavern and a fingerprint expert testified that he found the husband’s fingerprints on two of the bottles. Neither the husband or wife could identify the appellants, who did not testify. In finding the appellants guilty, the trial judge pointed out that the State had shown that two men, one wearing a stocking mask and carrying a rifle, the other wielding a pistol, had robbed the White Way Tavern. The appellants were found in a car shortly after the robbery, some five to ten miles from the tavern, and the car contained a rifle, a pistol, a silk stocking and bottles of whiskey which came from the tavern.

He reasoned that a partially empty bottle with a pouring spout would not be sold as package goods and, therefore, it must have been taken, not purchased, from the tavern. On the basis of these circumstances, he concluded that the appellants were guilty of committing the armed robbery. We cannot say that his conclusion was clearly erroneous.

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