Sutton v. State

Per Curiam. Clarence James Sutton, the appellant, was convicted in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County by Judge John Grason Turnbull, sitting without a jury, under an indictment charging forgery, causing an instrument to be forged, uttering a forged instrument, and obtaining money by false pretenses. He contends on this appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support the ⁷² conviction. He makes no complaint of the general verdict.

The sentence was confinement for a term of seven years. The evidence shows that Sutton on June 23, 1966 presented a check to Irving Davis to be cashed. The check was apparently made by the Paul Pet Construction Company and was payable to Lawyer W. Boice. Sutton produced suitable identification, and the check was cashed for him; however, it was subsequently returned to Davis by the bank with the notation that the check bore unauthorized signatures.

Henry Becker, accountant for the Paul Pet Construction Company, testified that company checks were missing, or had been stolen, and that neither Mascón Cosen or M. Kickner (the signatures on the check) were authorized to sign checks for the company, and furthermore that no authorized check of the company had been issued to Lawyer W. Boice. Davis positively identified Sutton at the trial. Samples of Sutton’s handwriting, taken from two forms that Sutton filled out when he was admitted to the Baltimore County Jail, were offered into evidence as well as samples of Lawyer W. Boice’s handwriting. Detective Sergeant Howard De Shields, a handwriting expert, made a comparison of the known writing of Sutton and of the known handwriting of Lawyer W. Boice.

He testified that the endorsement on the check of Lawyer W. Boice was written by Sutton. Sutton denied cashing the check. Identification by the victim, if believed, is enough to convict. Sutton v. State, 2 Md. App. 639 , 236 A. 2d 301 .

In a nonjury trial the judge determines the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses. Hutchinson v. State, 1 Md. App. 362 , 230 A. 2d 352 , Sadler v. State, 1 Md. App. 383 , 230 A.