Frederick Mefford v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary

413 F.2d 439, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11362
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 24, 1969
Docket11814_1
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 413 F.2d 439 (Frederick Mefford v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Frederick Mefford v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary, 413 F.2d 439, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11362 (4th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

With his conviction, July 30, 1962, of a murder and robbery committed on March 4, 1962, approved by Maryland’s highest court 1 , Frederick Mefford petitioned the Federal district court for relief through habeas corpus from the sentence of death. His prayer was grounded on the assertion that the conviction was based on an involuntary confession. The writ was denied. We affirm, on the opinion of the District Court. 2

There Chief Judge Thomsen with caution and clarity recounts the crime and the circumstances of the confession. He squarely meets and soundly resolves the imputations of invalidity arising from an alleged coercively-protracted detention following a concededly illegal arrest. He found Mefford’s spoken and written admissions of guilt and the manner of the felony’s commission wholly free of pressure, overbearing of will, or inducement of any kind. The judge’s recital of the facts he finds altogether warrants his conclusion.

Upholding the judgment against Mef-ford, the Maryland Court of Appeals declared inapplicable to State prosecutions the pronouncement upon confessions of the Supreme Court in Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). The District Court did not make this distinction, nor do we, for nothing is seen in Wong Sun to call for disturbance of the decision here. Cf. United States v. Close, 349 F.2d 841 (4 Cir. 1965).

The order on review is affirmed.

Affirmed.

1

. Mefford v. State, 235 Md. 497, 201 A.2d 824 (1964) on direct appeal from conviction, and Mefford v. Warden, 243 Md. 696, 221 A.2d 906 (1966) on statutory post conviction proceedings.

2

. Mefford v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary, 270 F.Supp. 745 (1967).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
413 F.2d 439, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frederick-mefford-v-warden-maryland-penitentiary-ca4-1969.