Calloway
v.
State

Court of Appeals of MarylandApr 1, 1965
238 Md. 612 (Md. 1965)
238 Md. 612208 A.2d 373

Cases citing this case

How cited

  • Hopkins and Terry v. State

    211 A.2d 831 (Md. 1965)

    …However, we think the State's evidence, if believed by the trial judge (as it obviously was), was sufficient…

  • Pointer v. State

    209 A.2d 600 (Md. 1965)

    …Since it is apparent that the lower court was not wrong, the judgment will not be set aside. Graczyk v.…

lock 2 Citing caseskeyboard_arrow_right

[No. 220, September Term, 1964.]

Decided April 1, 1965.

CRIMINAL LAW — Non-Jury Cases — Weight Of Evidence And Credibility Of Witnesses Are Matters Primarily For Trial Court To Determine — Weight Of Evidence Not Reviewable On Appeal — Evidence Was Sufficient, If Believed, To Convict This Defendant, Had Point Been Raised. p. 613

Decided April 1, 1965.

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

Joseph E. Calloway was convicted in non-jury cases of three assaults (one with intent to murder), stealing a pistol and carrying it concealed about his person. From the judgments entered thereon, he appeals.

Affirmed.

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

Morris Lee Kaplan, with whom was Michael Lee Kaplan on the brief, for the appellant.

Fred Oken, Assistant Attorney General, with whom were Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General, William J. O'Donnell, State's Attorney for Baltimore City, and Bernard Silbert, Assistant State's Attorney, on the brief, for the appellee.


The only contention of this appellant is that his convictions by the court of the three assaults (one with intent to murder) with which he was charged and the charges of stealing a pistol and carrying it concealed about his person were against the weight of the evidence.

The contention, which could have been raised below on a motion for a new trial, is not reviewable on appeal. Time and time again we have held that the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses are matters primarily for the trial court to determine. Spencer v. State, 235 Md. 129. His motions in these non-jury cases for judgments of acquittal having been denied, the appellant was entitled to appellate review of the legal sufficiency of the evidence, but he chose not to seek a reversal on this ground apparently because the evidence, as the record discloses, was clearly sufficient, if believed, to convict him of the several offenses for which he was indicted. Judgments of conviction based on such evidence will not be set aside. Graczyk v. State, 233 Md. 245.

Judgments affirmed.