Doyle Delmar Royal v. State of Maryland ( 1976 )


Menu:
  • PER CURIAM:

    Upon consideration of the briefs, the record and the argument in this case, we find no reversible error.

    The lineup conducted by the police was impermissibly suggestive, but, in light of all the positive identification testimony and strong evidence of guilt, admission of the evidence concerning pretrial identification was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

    We are satisfied that the Court of Appeals of Maryland properly rejected the confrontation contention discussed in the dissenting opinion of our brother Winter. See Royal v. State of Maryland, 236 Md. 443, 204 A.2d 500. We will not repeat the extended discussion of the matter in the state court. The two witnesses did take the stand and were sworn, and they answered all questions propounded to them. Counsel for the defense stopped short of questions about Royal’s alibi claim that he was with his two co-defendants shortly before the robbery, but was left by them and later picked up by them after the robbery had been completed. Doubtless he did so because he could think of no way to frame the question without reference to the participation by the witnesses in the robbery, a matter as to which the witnesses had invoked their Fifth Amendment privilege.

    Affirmed.

Document Info

Docket Number: 75--1589

Judges: Haynsworth, Winter, Field

Filed Date: 1/26/1976

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024