Court Opinion

ID: 9637506
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:08:12.270902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:56.781789
License: Public Domain

ELDRIDGE, Judge,
dissenting.
The State in this case produced evidence that Bentley Dixon, carrying a folded newspaper and displaying what Diane Cole characterized as a “cold, hard look” in his eyes, handed a note to Cole requesting money in a “hurry.” The State produced no evidence of any action or conduct on Dixon’s part “reasonably tending to create the apprehension in another that [Dixon was] about to apply force” to Cole, which, as the majority notes, must be proved to convict Dixon of assault in Maryland. When the State fails to produce any evidence of one of the elements of an offense, a conviction on that charge cannot stand.
The construction some federal courts have given 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) does lend a degree of support to the majority’s view that the State produced evidence to support a conviction for assault. Nevertheless, I see no reason to apply cases interpreting a federal statute to distort the Maryland law governing assault in order to save the State from the consequences of having charged the wrong crime. Under the law of Maryland, Dixon might properly have *465been convicted of attempted larceny. He should not have been convicted of assault with intent to rob. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.
Judge COLE has authorized me to state that he concurs with the views expressed herein.