Starliper v. State

Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant in this case was arrested upon a warrant dated the 9th of September, 1914, issued by John Ankeny, a justice of the peace of the State of Maryland, in and for Wáshington County, upon the oath of Ótto W. King, who charges that the traverser “did-unlawfully on August 14th, 1914, carry a deadly weapon commonly called a revolver concealed upon or about his person, contrary to law.” On the 14th of September, 1914, a jury trial was prayed on the part of the State to the November term of the Circuit Court for Washington County, and on the following day the warrant and papers were transmitted by the- justice of the peace to the Clerk of the Circuit Court, and filed in his office. The appellant was tried and convicted before a jury at a regular term of the Circuit Court for Washington County on December 1st, 1914, and was sentenced by the Court on the 4th day of December, 1914, to the Maryland House of Correction for the period of two years. Erom this judgment he has taken this appeal. ²⁹⁷ At the trial of the case in. the Court below the traverser reserved ten bills of exceptions.

Six of these relate to the rulings of the Court upon the admissibility of evidence. The seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth exceptions were to the .action of the Court in overruling motions to set aside the verdict and for a suspension of sentence pending an application for a pardon. The first question to be considered on an appeal to this Court in cases of this kind is one of jurisdiction, and that is, whether the Circuit Court for Washington County had power and jurisdiction to hear and determine the case. The proceedings in the case were originated before the justice of the peace, under section 39 of Article 27, sub-title “Concealed Weapons,” Bagby’s Code, Vol. 3, page 322.

By Chapter 146 of the Acts of 1914, two additional sections, to be known as sections 30A and 30B, were added to the section of the Code then in force in the State. By section 3OB of this Act, jurisdiction original and concurrent with the Circuit Courts having criminal jurisdiction was given to the justices of the peace of the State, and they were given power to try and determine all such cases, to the same extent as the Circuit Courts of the State, having criminal jurisdiction, could do in such cases. By the latter part of this section it is provided as follows: “that if any person, when brought before any such justice having jurisdiction of the case shall, before the trial for the alleged offense, pray a jury trial, or the State’s Attorney for the county or city where the offense occurs, shall, -before the trial of such •alleged offense, pray a jury trial on behalf of the State', it ■shall be the duty of the justice to commit such alleged offender for trial, or to hold him to bail to appear for trial in the Court having jurisdiction in the case, at its then or next session.” The justice of the peace is further required to' return the papers with the names, etc., * * * of the 'witnesses, forthwith to the Clerk of the Circuit Court where the trial is to be had, and to inform the accused, when brought before him, for trial of his right to demand a jury trial. ²⁹⁸ It will be