Leek v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Per curiam
The appellant, convicted by a jury of rape but acquitted of perverted practice, claims prejudice because he was required to be tried on both charges in the same trial, he having been arraigned on the perverted practice charge but a few minutes before the trial began. The claim of prejudice is refuted by the fact the jury found him not guilty of perverted practice. If the cases had been tried separately the prosecuting witness could have testified in the rape case to the occurrence of the perverted practice, as she did, Presley v. State, 224 Md. 550, cert. den. 368 U. S. 957, and, thus, no…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Shoemaker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
- Presley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961
- Saldiveri v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
- Wright v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
- Cohen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1937
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- JOHNSON, ETC. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Lawson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
- State v. WernerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
- Cooper v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
- Cole v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.