Merritt v. State

Sep 1, 1984
[No. 84, September Term, 1959.]
Reporters:
,
Before:
Brune
Per Curiam.

In this appeal are involved two charges of larceny presented in two ‍‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‍indictments, one charging the accused with grand larceny, the other with theft, or petit larceny. The *119 defendant appeared in court without counsel, and was tried on ‍‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‍the same day that Hill v. State, infra, was decided by this Court. The record fails affirmatively to show a compliance with Rule 723 b and c; consequently, ‍‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‍under the authority of Hill v. State, 218 Md. 120, Bryant v. State, 218 Md. 151, and Williams v. State, 220 Md. 180, the judgments and sentences must be reversed. With ‍‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‍this ruling in his favor, we deem it unnecessary to consider the other points raised in the appellant’s brief.

Judgments reversed, and cases remanded for a ‍‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‍new trial, the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore to pay the costs.