| Grammer v. State, 203 Md 200
Grammer v. State, 203 Md. 200, 100 A.2d 257 (1953).
Lexis Opinion
Grammer v. Maryland, 347 U.S. 938, 74 S. Ct. 634, 98 L. Ed. 1088 (1954). - writ of cert denied
Lexis Opinion
Trial Court records:
BALTIMORE CITY CRIMINAL COURT (Criminal Docket) State v. George Edward Grammer, September Term 1952 Indictment No. 3544, pp. 7, 465 and 445. [MSA C1849-176, 3/30/6/1]
BALTIMORE CITY CRIMINAL COURT (Transcripts) George E. Grammer, 1952, Box 1 No. 3544 [MSA T 496-67, 0/2/2/39]
Interrogation of G. Edward Grammer, 8/30/52
Court Transcript, Part I: Sept. 16, Oct. 14, 1952, p. 1-205
Court Transcript, Part II: Oct. 15, 1952, p. 205-450
Court Transcript, Part III: Oct. 16, 1952, p. 451-667
Court Transcript, Part IV: Oct. 17, 1952, p. 668-862
Court Transcript, Part V: Oct. 18, 1952, p. 863-951
Court Transcript, Part VI: Oct. 20, 1952, p. 952-1145
Court Transcript, Part VII: Oct. 21 and 23, 1952, p. 1146-1196
State's Exhibits
Defendant's Exhibits
Appeallate material
Includes opinion of Supreme Bench, confession, and other information
Note: No additional records for this case BALTIMORE CITY CRIMINAL COURT (Criminal Papers) MSA T 495
Supreme Bench records:
Minutes and Supreme Bench opinion rejecting Grammer's appeal
Appellate records:
COURT OF APPEALS (Records and Briefs) Grammer v. State, October Term 1953 No. 18 [MSA S1733-1382, 1/27/3/179]
COURT OF APPEALS (Miscellaneous Papers) Grammer v. State, October Term 1953 No. 18 [MSA S397-136, 1/65/8/30]
COURT OF APPEALS (Opinions) Grammer v. State, October Term 1953 No. 18 [MSA S393-279, 1/66/6/27]
COURT OF APPEALS (U.S. Supreme Court Appeals) Grammer v. State, October Term 1953 No. 18 [MSA S450-1, 1/66/7/35]
Other records:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION OF VITAL RECORDS AND STATISTICS (Death Record, Counties) Dorothy M. Grammer, 20 August 1952, Baltimore County [MSA S1268-302, 2/15/1/46]
BALTIMORE CITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS (Death Record) George E. Grammer, 11 June 1954, Certificate No. 5022 [MSA C2108-107, 2/19/1/111]
References from the Pratt vertical file and other research notes courtesy of Bill Sleeman, University of Maryland School of Law.
Note: This case is included in the index to the Attorney General's Case Papers as file number 6800-1953. Warehouse searched the following box, but did not locate this file.
ATTORNEY GENERAL
(Case File)
MSA T2261
Dates: n.d.
Box No.: 346
Description: 6784-6801
Accession No.: 74W8
MSA No.: T2261-159
Location: HF/5/12/61
Biographies:
Judge Herman M. Moser, MSA SC 3520-14357
Anselm Sodaro, Baltimore City State's Attorney, MSA SC 3520-13926
J. Harold Grady, Assistant Baltimore City State's Attorney, MSA SC 3520-12488
Anthony Federico, Grammer's defense attorney before the Baltimore City Criminal Court
"Anthony Federico, 87, gained fame as lawyer for killer in 1952 case." The Sun, 9 March 2001.
Theodore and Joseph Sherbow, and Edward F. Shea were Grammer's appellant counsel.
See ecpclio sc5339-62-94
PROCEDURAL
POSTURE: Defendant appealed the decision of the Criminal
Court of
Baltimore City (Maryland), which denied his motion for a new trial
after convicting him for first degree murder. Defendant argued that
pretrial publicity had prevented him from getting an impartial jury
or a fair trial, that he was forced to have a bench trial, that his
confessions were not voluntary, and that the evidence was
insufficient to support his conviction.
OVERVIEW:
Defendant was charged with the murder of his wife, whom he hit with
an iron pipe, placed in the driver's seat of a car, and propelled
into traffic. The case was highly publicized. Defense counsel
requested a bench trial. The criminal court convicted defendant of
first degree murder. On appeal, defendant argued that the pretrial
publicity had deprived him of the right to a trial by an impartial
jury. The court disagreed. The State's announcement of the murder
charge was proper and necessary. The press discussed the same
elements of the crime that were proved in the trial. The court
explained that a jury could not be presumed to be unbiased. Defendant
was required to show the bias of individual jurors. Yet defendant
neither exercised his right to voir dire nor filed a motion for
removal. Moreover, defendant's decision to be tried before a judge
was not a waiver of the right to a jury; rather, it was defendant's
election of whom he believed to be the most favorable factfinder. The
court found that defendant's oral and written confessions were
voluntary. The evidence was such that the criminal court could have
been convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court
affirmed.
OUTCOME: The court held that the pretrial
publicity had not precluded defendant's right to a trial by an
impartial jury, that he had elected a bench trial, that his
confessions were voluntary, and that the evidence was sufficient to
support his first degree murder conviction. The court affirmed.
|
