STATE V. SOWELL
353 Md. 713, 728 A.2d 712 (1999)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal by the State (P) from the reversal of Sowell's (D) conviction holding that the evidence presented to the jury was not sufficient to support a finding that D was present at the scene of the crime, either constructively or actually.
FACTS: D was employed by Recycling Incorporated. He asked how employees were to be paid and he picked up his pay around 12:30 p.m. About an hour later, three men wearing dark clothing and carrying guns entered the office. One man walked directly to Brian Fowler, the vice-president of the company, and held a gun on him. A second man put a gun to Ms. Holmes' head and told her to get the cash. She placed all of the cash, $14,600, in a bag provided by one of the men and the three men left. Ms. Holmes testified that the man who held the gun to her head seemed familiar with the office and knew where the money was located. Testimony indicated that D was the mastermind behind the robbery. A witness stated that prior to the robbery, D told him he knew where they could get some easy money and that he had it 'all planned out.' Testimony also indicated that D had a map of the recycling center detailing where the employees would be standing, who should be grabbed, and who might have a gun. D also told the others that the robbery should occur between 11:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. and that while the robbery was in process, he would be on his route for the recycling company. The men arranged to meet later to split up the money. The witness also saw the men involved in the robbery the next day. D said that 'it was easy, just like he had planned.' D was convicted but it was overturned on appeal.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment