In 1982, a jury sitting in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City found Sam Ivor, a/k/a King Sam Ivor, appellant, guilty of kidnapping, extortion, robbery with a deadly weapon, first-degree rape, first-degree sexual offense, unnatural and perverted sex practice, and two counts of false imprisonment.
The total sentence imposed was, in the sentencing judge’s summarizing remarks, “two consecutive life sentences plus fifty years consecutive to those life sentences, all to date from September 16, 1981.”
In 1992, Ivor petitioned the circuit court to correct an illegal sentence, asserting that his sentences should be served concurrently. He acknowledged that the sentencing court had imposed consecutive sentences, but because it then stated that the sentences were “all to date from September 16, 1981,” he claimed that the effect was to make them run concurrently. Ivor raised the same challenge several other times.
In 2012, Ivor filed yet another motion to correct an illegal sentence and, once again, contended his sentences should be deemed to run concurrently. In a supplement to that motion, Ivor further claimed that his sentences were illegal because of alleged defects in the polling of the jury and the hearkening of their verdicts.
Ivor claims that the poll was defective because the clerk failed to poll the forelady. As a result, he asserts that “it is impossible to know if the jury was unanimous.”
The circuit court denied the motion, prompting this appeal.
1 of 1 article
0 articles remaining
Grow your business intelligence with The Daily Record. Register now for more article access.