Ridley v. State
This text of 151 A.2d 915 (Ridley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The sole question involved in this appeal is whether the appellant, who was convicted of the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle under the Code (1957), Article 27, Section 349, possessed criminal intent, a necessary element of the offense, Anello v. State, 201 Md. 164, when he was physically using an automobile belonging to another. The question of his intention, of course, involved a question of fact. We recently quoted from a celebrated statement of Lord Bowen in an action of deceit to the effect that the state oí a man’s mind is as much a question of fact as the state of his digestion. Tufts v. Poore, 219 Md. 1, 11. We have carefully examined the record; the evidence, and permissible inferences therefrom, fully support the finding of the trial judge that the appellant possessed criminal intent when using the automobile. Anello v. State, supra.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
151 A.2d 915, 220 Md. 182, 1959 Md. LEXIS 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ridley-v-state-md-1959.