Maryland case law › State's Attorney v. One (1) 1971 Pontiac

State's Attorney v. One (1) 1971 Pontiac

267 Md. 609 (1973) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: DismissedMcWilliams, J.✓ Good law
HoldingIn October 1971, the State's Attorney for Prince George's County filed a petition under Md.

McWilliams, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. In October 1971 the State’s Attorney for Prince George’s County, pursuant to Code (1971 Repl. Vol.), Art. 27, § 297, filed a petition for the forfeiture of a Pontiac, two other motor vehicles, and $6,700 in currency, said to belong to one Soles, the owner of the Pontiac. General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC), also claiming to be the owner of the Pontiac by virtue of its being the assignee of a conditional sales contract between Soles and the dealer, intervened and, answering the petition, sought to gain possession of the vehicle or to be paid the balance due it ($5,104.46).

GMAC disclaimed any “interest in the currency [$6,700] sought to be forfeited.” In the summer of 1972 the trial judge, McCullough, J., passed the order which follows: “Upon consideration of the petition for the forfeiture of . . . [the] Pontiac . . . , and answer thereto filed by intervenor . . . [GMAC], the matter having been heard in open Court, and there being no just cause for delay, it is this 25th day of July, 1972, by the Circuit Court for Prince Georges County, Maryland, “ORDERED and directed that said vehicle be delivered to . . .. [GMAC].” The transcript shows that the order was filed the same day (25 July 1972). On 27 July Judge McCullough passed the order set forth below: “This matter having come on for hearing on the 25th day of July, 1972 on the Petition for Forfeiture of . . . [the] Pontiac . . . , and Answer thereto filed by Intervenor . . . [GMAC], 611 and this Member of the Bench having previously written an opinion declaring Section 297 of Article 27 to be unconstitutional 1 , and that nothing has happened since said Order to change the Court’s mind, and it further appearing that the Order of July 25, 1972 ordered that the . . . [Pontiac] be delivered to . . . [GMAC] and the court now being of the opinion that the court had no authority to order the deliverance of said motor vehicle, but only had authority to dismiss the Petition filed herein, it is thereupon, this 27th day of July, 1972, by the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, Maryland, “ORDERED, that the Order of Court dated July 25, 1972 be and

This is a preview of State's Attorney v. One (1) 1971 Pontiac. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.