WILSON v. STATE

[No. 176, September Term, 1964.]

237 Md. 634 (1965)

206 A.2d 698

WILSON v. STATE

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Decided February 4, 1965.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Howard M. Heneson, with whom was Roland Walker on the brief, for appellant.

Robert J. Martineau, Assistant Attorney General, with whom were Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General, William J. O'Donnell and Charles E. Moylan, Jr., State's Attorney and Assistant State's Attorney, respectively, for Baltimore City on the brief, for appellee.

The cause was argued before HAMMOND, HORNEY, MARBURY, SYBERT and OPPENHEIMER, JJ.


PER CURIAM:

The sole question raised on this appeal is whether the defendant was sufficiently identified to prove that he had participated in the burglary of which he was convicted. The contention is that the testimony of the eyewitnesses (two teen-age girls) was so uncertain and contradictory as to be unworthy of belief.

Both eyewitnesses had seen two men — one was white and the other colored — enter the burglarized premises, but they differed...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases