Powell v. State

Per Curiam. Appellant was convicted by the court sitting without a jury of robbery with a deadly weapon and common-law assault on three separate indictments and sentenced to a total of forty years imprisonment. Appellant contends on this appeal that his reindictment as commanded by Schowgurow v. State, 240 Md. 121 was invalid since the Grand Jury continued to be illegally constituted as no new law had been enacted by the State Legislature “so that it is illegal and unconstitutional to try him under a non-existing law.” Virtually the same contention was raised and rejected in Hutchinson v. State, 1 Md. App. 362 . We therefore find the appellant to have been validly reindicted.

Appellant also contends, in effect, that Iris conviction was unconstitutional because the judge before whom he was tried without a jury was required, as a qualification of office, to affirm a belief in the existence of God. This contention is also lacking in merit, having been decided against appellant’s position in Ralph v. Warden, 245 Md. 74 . See also Ralph v. Brough, 248 F. Supp. 334 . Appellant next contends that “all accusing witnesses against the petitioner” should be “disqualified” under Article 21 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights because he was placed in a lineup where he was behind a screen and could not see his accusers.

We find this contention frivolous. There is no showing that the line-up conducted in this case was either unfair or unreliable and there is nothing per se unconstitutional about a police line-up. See United States v. Wade, 388 U. S. 218 , 87 Sup. Ct. 1926, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1149 ; Gilbert v. California, 388 U. S. 263 , 87 Sup.

Ct. 1951, 18 L. Ed. 1178 ; and Stovall v. Denno, 388 U. S. 293 , 87 Sup. Ct. 1967, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1199 ; all decided on June 12, 1967. Appellant’s further contention that his arrest was unlawful is likewise without merit. It is well settled that an illegal arrest does not invalidate a subsequent conviction, Nadolski v. ⁴⁹⁹ State,