Murphy v. State

Gilbert, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. In the law of evidence, a line as sharp as a razor’s edge may separate evidence which is sufficient from evidence which is insufficient to prove the identity of a criminal defendant. Our task in this case is to hone the edge. The precise problem of identification now before us had its roots in the events of October 21, 1979, when the appellant was stopped by Deputy J.R. Taylor of the Harford County Sheriff’s Department for operating a motor vehicle with a "loud exhaust.” At that time, the appellant failed to produce a driver’s license and gave his name as "Arvil Raymond Murphy” when questioned by the deputy.

Deputy Taylor proceeded to "run a check” on this name by means of the Sheriffs computer tie-in with the Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA). The "check” was unproductive. The appellant was, therefore, issued a citation for operating a motor vehicle without a driver’s license. Subsequently, it was discovered that the appellant’s true name was "Raymond Arvil Murphy,” and that he had reversed his first and second names when he identified himself to the deputy.

A second investigation was made through the MVA. It bore fruit. The driving record of "Raymond Arvil Murphy” showed that his license as an operator had been revoked since July 31, 1979. On the sole basis of this record, the appellant was convicted, in the Circuit Court for Harford ³⁸⁹ County (Close, J.), of driving while his license was suspended or revoked and was committed to the County Detention Center for one year.

The issue before us is the sufficiency of the driving record as evidence identifying the "Raymond Arvil Murphy” thereon as the "Raymond Arvil Murphy” charged. The trial judge’s resolution of this issue was not clearly erroneous, Md. Rule 1086, and we, therefore, affirm. Existing law states that "[e]ven if no witness physically identifies a defendant in the courtroom, identification by name is enough.” Sallie v. State, 24 Md. App. 468, 482