From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

El-Masri v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Mar 16, 1962
178 A.2d 407 (Md. 1962)

Opinion

[No. 209, September Term, 1961.]

Decided March 16, 1962.

APPEAL — Printed Record Extract Held Sufficient. In this appeal, although the printed record extract was very thin and the facts were quite simple and there was little dispute as to them, the printed record extract was held to be sufficient and, hence, the appeal was not dismissed for failure to comply with Maryland Rule 828 b 1. p. 115

CRIMINAL LAW — Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Held Not Denied Where Defendant Held In Jail For Four Months Pending Trial. In this forgery case, the defendant was a citizen of the United Arab Republic. He was held in jail for four months pending trial and contended that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The record discloses he was not tried sooner due to correspondence between the trial judge and the Embassy of the United Republic and authorities in Egypt, in an attempt to obtain aid for the defendant. It was held there was no denial of constitutional rights. p. 115

CRIMINAL LAW — Forgery — Signing Of Fictitious Names On Checks, No Defense. In this forgery case, it was held that the signing of fictitious names, rather than that of real persons, was no defense. pp. 115-116

CRIMINAL LAW — Forgery — Finding That Monies Received Were Not Loans Not Clearly Erroneous. In this forgery case, defendant contended that the monies received were loans and that this was a good defense. It was held that, assuming this was true, the trial court found that the monies were not loans and this finding was not clearly erroneous. p. 116

WITNESSES — Do Not Have To Be Parties. Witnesses do not have to be parties to the case. p. 116

Decided March 16, 1962.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore City (CARTER, J.).

Fawzi Ahmed El-Masri was convicted of forgery and he appealed.

Motion to dismiss overruled; judgments affirmed.

The cause was submitted to HENDERSON, PRESCOTT, HORNEY, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.

Submitted on brief by Clarence E. Pusey, Jr., for appellant.

Submitted on brief by Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General, Joseph S. Kaufman, Deputy Attorney General, Saul A. Harris and Russell J. White, State's Attorney and Assistant State's Attorney, respectively, of Baltimore City, for appellee.


The State has moved to dismiss the appeal for the alleged failure of appellant to comply with Maryland Rule 828 b 1. Although the record extract is rather thin, the facts of the case are quite simple, and there is little dispute concerning them; hence the motion to dismiss is overruled. Cf. Klein v. Dougherty, 200 Md. 22, 87 A.2d 821.

Appellant first complains that he was held in jail for four months pending trial, which resulted in a denial of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. He is a citizen of the United Arab Republic, and the record discloses that he was not tried sooner due to certain correspondence between the trial judge and the Embassy of the United Arab Republic and authorities in Egypt, in an attempt to obtain aid and assistance for the appellant. There was no denial of constitutional rights here. On the contrary, there was a serious effort made to help an accused, in a foreign land, charged with crime.

Appellant next contends that he should not have been convicted of forgery, because he signed fictitious names on the checks, rather than those of real persons. The contention is without merit. Lyman v. State, 136 Md. 40, 109 A. 548. He also claims the monies received by him were loans, and the checks were accepted as security for the loans. If we assume that such facts would constitute defenses to charges of forgery, his statements to that effect were denied, and the trial court did not believe the appellant — a finding which we definitely cannot say is clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 886 a.

Finally, appellant makes the novel and unusual claim that the witness, Kouimanis, was improperly permitted to testify, since she was not a party to the case. There is no requirement in our jurisprudence that a witness be a party to the cause, in order to render her competent to testify.

Motion to dismiss overruled; judgments affirmed.


Summaries of

El-Masri v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Mar 16, 1962
178 A.2d 407 (Md. 1962)
Case details for

El-Masri v. State

Case Details

Full title:EL-MASRI v . STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Mar 16, 1962

Citations

178 A.2d 407 (Md. 1962)
178 A.2d 407

Citing Cases

Gross v. State

Since the delay was precipitated by appellant's own actions and was for his benefit, the delay is chargeable…

Arundel Asphalt v. Morrison

At argument, we reserved decision on the appellees' motion to dismiss under Rule 835 b (5) because of…