Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Rucker v. State
Citations: 76 A.2d 572; 196 Md. 334; 1950 Md. LEXIS 420Docket: [Nos. 21-22, October Term, 1950.]
Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland; November 15, 1950; Maryland; State Supreme Court
Joseph Edward Rucker and Samuel S. Bailey were convicted in St. Mary's County Circuit Court for possession of lottery tickets, violating Code 1939, art. 27, sec. 411. Each received a six-month sentence in the Maryland House of Correction and a $100 fine. The convictions stemmed from an incident on February 21, 1950, where Rucker admitted to driving a Plymouth sedan involved in an accident. Upon investigation, police discovered numbers slips and cash in the vehicle, alongside a notebook in Rucker's possession, which recorded financial transactions related to lottery activities. The primary argument from the appellants was the inadmissibility of the evidence obtained, claiming the search and seizure were unlawful due to a lack of a warrant. However, Maryland law permits police to arrest individuals for misdemeanors committed in their presence without a warrant and allows for searches of individuals and their immediate surroundings during lawful arrests. The court upheld this principle, referencing prior cases that affirm the legality of such searches and the admissibility of evidence obtained. An officer may seize items, including books and papers, related to the unlawful possession or sale of contraband during an arrest, even if those items are not physically on the person but within their immediate control. In Blager v. State, the court upheld the officer's right to arrest a defendant after lottery tickets were discovered in his pocket without coercion. The legality of the search and seizure extends beyond the individual to their immediate surroundings, and in the cases discussed, the items were clearly within the defendants' control. The arrests were deemed lawful as the misdemeanors occurred in plain view, allowing further searches without a warrant. Rucker, one of the appellants, argued insufficient evidence for conviction based on a co-defendant's claim of sole ownership of the contraband. However, the trial judge found the co-defendant's testimony untrustworthy and ruled that the slips were jointly possessed. Maryland law criminalizes possession of materials related to lottery activities, making any possession unlawful, regardless of intent. The judgments in both cases were affirmed with costs.