Swann v. State

Markell, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Appellant and Clarence Ross were found guilty by the court, sitting as a jury, of breaking the storehouse (a tavern) of Edwin A. Blandford with intent to steal, take and carry away certain goods and chattels of another of the value of $25 or more. Appellant was sentenced to ten years in the penitentiary. From this judgment he appeals.

Charles Joseph Hawkins and Paul Revere Hodge were indicted for receiving stolen goods and after appellant’s conviction pleaded guilty and were given suspended sentences. Appellant says he was convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of Hawkins and Hodge, accomplices in his alleged crime. We may assume, without deciding, that Hawkins and Hodge may be regarded as accomplices. Luery v. State, 116 Md. 284, 295, 296 , 81 A. 681, 685 , Ann. Cas. 1913D, 161.

This court has approved the view that a conviction on the uncorroborated evidence of accomplices ought not to stand. Lanasa v. State, 109 Md. 602, 613 , 71 A. 1058 . But in Maryland the .jury are the judges of law, as well ¹¹ as of fact, including the legal questions of sufficiency of evidence to convict or to corroborate evidence of accomplices. The verdict of the jury on such questions is not reviewable on