Newman v. State

Orth, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On 23 September 1971 GABLE NEWMAN, in a criminal cause docketed below as Criminal Trials 10,921, was found guilty at a bench trial in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County of two offenses committed on 13 November 1970, as charged in the 1st and 2nd counts of the indictment returned against him, videlicet: (1) the breaking of the dwelling of Kay Frances Wright with intent to commit the felony of larceny; and (2) the grand larceny of goods belonging to her. On 10 January 1972 he was sentenced to 10 years less 4 weeks, two years of the sentence to run consecutive to and 8 years to run concurrent with a sentence imposed in another case docketed below as Criminal Trials 10,920, in which we affirmed the judgment by unreported opinion, Newman v. State, No. 686 September Term 1971, filed 22 May 1972. On appeal he questions the sufficiency of the evidence.

His argument does not go to the corpus delicti of the offenses but only to his criminal agency. Newman’s criminal agency was established by the finding of latent fingerprints on a carton of cigarettes in the broken dwelling. The latent prints were lifted from the carton and compared with rolled prints of Newman. The testimony was that Newman’s left thumb had impressed the print on the carton.

However, Detective John M. ⁷⁰⁴ Lloyd said he lifted the latent prints from the carton on 13 November 1970; Detective Daniel R. Olds said he arrested Newman under the authority of a warrant “on November 19, 1970 approximately 8:30 p.m.” and “processed him through at Hyattsville Precinct,” fingerprinting and photographing him; Alpheous B. Masters, an expert in the field, said he was requested to compare the prints lifted from the carton with Newman’s rolled prints on 16 November 1970 and completed the examination on 17 November 1970. Newman argues that “the finding of the expert witness was an impossible conclusion, inasmuch as he could not have compared the defendant’s fingerprint on November 17th because the defendant below was not arrested and fingerprinted until November 19th, 1970.” He concludes: “While Mr. Masters may have testified in all honesty as to his finding 12 points of comparison between Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2, the inescapable conclusion is simply that Mr. Masters was, on November 17, 1970, comparing the prints on State’s Exhibit No. 1 with the finger print of someone other than the defendant.” Exhibit No. 1 was a card bearing the latent prints lifted from the carton of cigarettes. The card bore notations as follows: “DATE 11/13/70 TIME 1422 LIFT No. #3 TYPE OF CASE B & E Wright, Kay F. ADDRESS 612 62nd PI. Seat Pleasant, Md. LIFTED FROM a cardboard carton of Kool cigarettes LIFTED BY Lloyd LATENT PRINTCASE No. 70-317-193” Exhibit No. 2 was a card containing the impressions of inked fingerprints.

It purported to be the prints of Gable Newman, 5402 Nash St., Chapel Oaks, Md., and bore a signature “Gable Newman”. It described Newman: “Sex Male; Race Negro; Ht. 5'11"; Wt. 150; Date of birth 4-28-52; Hair black; eyes Brown; Place of Birth Washington, D.C.” Detective Olds signed the card as the official taking the prints. The date fingerprinted was given as ⁷⁰⁵ 11-19-70. Under the heading “Number” was stamped “20896.” The State also introduced an exhibit no. 3.

It was a blowup of a latent fingerprint and an inked fingerprint and showed twelve points of comparison relating to case no. 70-317-193. We do not know why the State made no attempt to clear up the matter. The point was brought out expressly at the close of evidence offered by the State on argument on motion for judgment of acquittal which was denied. 1 Thereafter Newman testified in his own behalf. But he merely denied being on the premises on the day of the breaking, claiming that he had been home. “Well, I remember that day because I did not go to work that day, you know.

I stayed home and slept most of that day. I was tired. I had been working hard, you know, most all that week and I was just tired.” He was not asked the