Krauser, C.J., Wright, Raker, Irma S. (Senior Judge,
Specially Assigned), JJ.
a jury trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Ivan
Potts, appellant, was convicted of wearing, carrying, and
transporting a firearm; possession of a firearm after having
been convicted of a crime of violence; and possession of
ammunition after having been prohibited from possessing a
regulated firearm. He was sentenced to incarceration for a
term of eight years, the first five without the possibility
of parole, for the possession of a firearm offense, and
concurrent terms of one year for each of the other crimes.
This timely appeal followed.
presents the following questions for our consideration:
I. Did the trial court err in admitting hearsay during the
testimony of one of the police officers?
II. Must the commitment record and docket entries be
corrected to reflect accurately the sentence announced in
open court for wearing and carrying a firearm?
III. Did the circuit court err in imposing separate sentences
for possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a
crime of violence and possession of ammunition after having
been prohibited from possessing a regulated firearm?
IV. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the convictions?
reasons set forth below, we shall remand this case to the
circuit court for the purpose of correcting Potts's
commitment record and affirm in all other respects.
September 2, 2015, Baltimore City Police Sergeant Wayne
Jenkins, Detective Maurice Ward, and Detective Evodio Hendrix
were conducting an investigation, unrelated to the instant
case, in the West Forest Park area of Baltimore City. The
officers were in an unmarked police vehicle equipped with
lights and a siren, and were wearing plain clothes and black
tactical vests with the word "police" written in
white letters on the front and back. As they drove in the
wrong direction on Fairview Avenue approaching Chelsea
Terrace, they saw Potts walking toward them. When Potts was
about five to seven townhouses away, Sergeant Jenkins and
Detective Ward observed his left arm swinging freely and his
right hand "affixed to his mid-section, " grabbing
his dip area. Both officers testified that grabbing the dip
area is an indication that a person is armed.
looked up and appeared to notice the officers. He then took a
black handgun from his waistband, turned his back to the
officers, and fled. Detectives Ward and Hendrix exited the
police vehicle and chased Potts while Sergeant Jenkins gave
chase in the police vehicle. When Sergeant Jenkins next saw
Potts, he was running with both hands "open."
Shortly thereafter, Potts was apprehended by the detectives.
Detective Hendrix testified that none of the officers used a
baton or any other weapon resembling a baton.
Potts was apprehended, Sergeant Jenkins went back to the
location where he had last observed Potts and recovered a
loaded black and silver firearm with a magazine containing
sixteen rounds. Potts was transported to Central Booking by
Baltimore City Police Officer Richard Lyles. Central Booking
refused to receive Potts, so Officer Lyles drove him to St.
Agnes Hospital. Potts told Officer Lyles that "they
fucked me up." Officer Lyles observed an open wound on
two hours after Potts was arrested, Sergeant Jenkins and the
detectives were notified that Potts was at St. Agnes Hospital
because he had a laceration on his thigh. They went to the
hospital where they observed Potts's pants and saw that
they were not cut and did not have blood on them. Sergeant
Jenkins and Detective Ward testified that Potts had not made
any complaint about an injury after he was arrested.
Ingbretson, an expert in firearms operability, testified that
the weapon recovered by Sergeant Jenkins and the detectives
met the definition of a handgun and a firearm and that it was
operable. She also was given for examination a total of
sixteen cartridges, the maximum capacity for the handgun, one
of which was loaded in the gun and fifteen others that were
in the magazine.
parties stipulated that, as the result of a prior conviction,
Potts was prohibited from possessing a regulated firearm and
ammunition. We shall include additional facts as necessary in
our discussion of the questions presented.
first contends that the circuit court committed reversible
error in admitting hearsay evidence during Detective
Hendrix's testimony. He directs our attention to the
following portion of Detective Hendrix's testimony:
[PROSECUTOR]: So what, if anything, at that time did you do
after - do did you - did you observe your fellow detectives