|
This is an old relic that goes back 500
years, back to before the Revolution when
judges were ignorant and did not know
what it was all about and peers were al-
lowed to decide the law.
I believe the most telling argument made
against this particular ancient rule is
simply this, that a person in a criminal
action is entitled to be tried with the true
law, or with the law established.
Now. under this, a defendant's lawyer,
a clever defendant's lawyer can argue
whatever he wants and, as I think Delegate
Carson has pointed out, an equally clever
prosecutor can put out whatever he wants,
and the jury is left in the middle. I just
do not think that, being the only State in
the union to have this archaic law, we
should continue it. I do not think that the
argument that was made is a valid argu-
ment.
The argument made before our Com-
mittee was that it gives the defendant one
last chance to have some opportunity to
get off because of his attorney being able
to argue the law. I do not particularly feel
strongly about it personally. I am not a
criminal lawyer. It just seems to me it is
archaic, and that in view of recent rulings
it has no proper place in our declaration
of rights.
I want also to point out that we did do
research on this. Delegate Willoner has
used the term "blackjack" a number of
times here. He has not defined what "black-
jack" means. It seems as though it is some-
thing sinister if we conduct our criminal
procedure the same way as the other forty-
nine states, but I do not believe this is so.
We in our investigations have determined
very conclusively that a court cannot di-
rect a verdict of guilty against the de-
fendant, and that it never does happen.
I therefore believe we should continue
our same course of action and reject this
amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Marvin
Smith.
DELEGATE M. SMITH: Mr. Presi-
dent, I did not speak on this matter when
it was before the Convention previously.
There have been statements made here
that are just not in line with the practice
as I know it from the standpoint of the
trial of criminal cases.
I do not know how many cases I have
tried over the period of the last 22 years,
|
but it has been a substantial number. Never
have I had the experience in a small town,
in a small county, of a juror coming up to
me and saying "We did not understand the
law that you lawyers were putting to us",
but, Mr. President, I have had the experi-
ence of the jurors coming up to me and
saying in a civil case, "We do not or did
not understand the instruction of the court
to the jury."
The experience, as I have known it, has
not been getting together a mass of out-of-
state decisions or anything of that sort.
Usually it has been reading from Hocheimer
on Criminal Law, which is the bible, the
handbook of those who try criminal cases
in this State.
I think this is a defense mechanism
insofar as the rights of the people are
concerned.
Now, I have never known of a serious
miscarriage of justice in the trial of cases
in our area. I have known of at least one
case in a neighboring county where, tech-
nically, probably, a person was guilty of
a violation of the law in that he was in-
volved with a young lady who was 13
years and 11 months and 28 days old, and
had she been about three days older it
would not have been a hanging offense.
The attorney defending the accused quite
properly made the point to the jury that
they were in fact judges of the law and
the fact, and they might well consider all
factors in the situation, and they brought
in a verdict of not guilty.
Now, I do not ask for this as something
just for those of us who practice a little
bit, and I do not practice much any more,
the defense of criminal cases. I do ask for
it as a protective mechanism insofar as the
people of Maryland are concerned. I sup-
port the amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any fur-
ther discussion?
Delegate Gill.
DELEGATE GILL: Mr. President and
fellow delegates, I would like to present
the other side of the picture.
I have served on a jury. Of course I am
not a lawyer. I can understand reasonably
well, and I do appreciate the instructions
that come from the judges. In September,
when I came down here, I received another
notice to serve on a jury, and I would have
enjoyed doing so, knowing that I would get
instructions from a judge. However, I do
not think I would have accepted if it were
|
