State v. Gordon

Thompson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The State of Maryland herein appeals from the granting of a pre-trial motion to quash an indictment for defects in its institution. Upon the request of Milton Gordon, the appellee, the case was removed from Montgomery County to Garrett County where appellee’s motion to quash the indictment for defects in its institution was granted. The record shows the indictment was quashed because the foreman of the Montgomery County ⁶³⁶ grand jury was hand-picked by the court which the trial judge found in violation of the applicable statute, Chapter 578 of the Laws of Maryland, 1968, since superseded.

The question was presented below and here as one of statutory construction. No constitutional issue is presented. The appellee filed no brief and makes no argument. The State, as appellant, contends first that the grand jury foreman was selected consistent with Chapter 578.

Secondly, even were the selection not in strict compliance with Chapter 578, the State continues, the irregularity should not result in an indictment being quashed. We do not reach the second contention. In its relevant parts, Chapter 578 made additions to as well as repealing and re-enacting parts of Md. Code, Art. 51, “Juries.” Section 1 of Chapter 578 added sa new section 6A to Art. 51 of the Md. Code to create the position of jury commissioner for Montgomery County. The commissioner was to compile three lists: The Master List, the Service File, and the Annual List.

The Master List was to reflect as nearly as possible a fair and complete list of all persons eligible for jury duty in the County. Compiled under the supervision of the court, the Master List began with all existing lists of qualified jurors supplemented by election and tax lists. Under Section 6A (c) (i), the jury commissioner could also use any and all other listings necessary to compile the Master List. From the Master List is formed the Service File consisting of all those qualified to be jurors.

An Annual Listing was formed by the selection of at least two hundred names from the Service File, with special emphasis on “intelligence, sobriety and integrity.” After being apportioned by election district, the names are placed in a box for final drawing pursuant to a ratio and method provided. The first 22 names drawn at random are the grand jury, to serve with the foreman previously selected by the court. Petit jury panels are then drawn. The selection of the grand jury foreman is referred to ⁶³⁷ three times in Chapter 578.

In the new Section, 6A (d) (ii) of Art. 51, the act in final form says, “The foreman of the grand jury shall be selected by the court.” Section 10 (c) of Art. 51 states, “In Montgomery County, after the foreman of the grand jury shall have been selected, the remaining names shall be used for drawing those who shall serve as jurors. . . .” Lastly, in Section 12 (A) of Art. 51, the act