Parker v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

203 A.2d 418, 236 Md. 236, 1964 Md. LEXIS 864
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedSeptember 25, 1964
Docket[App. No. 2, September Term, 1964.]
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 203 A.2d 418 (Parker v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Parker v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary, 203 A.2d 418, 236 Md. 236, 1964 Md. LEXIS 864 (Md. 1964).

Opinion

Henderson, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellant’s conviction of armed robbery was affirmed on appeal to this court in 225 Md. 288. We found no merit in the contention that his confession was improperly admitted. A petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied in December, 1962. The present petition for post conviction relief was denied by Judge Carter, who expressly found that his arrest was legal and that in any event nothing was seized or offered in evidence against him. The only point not covered by Judge Carter, or decided in the prior proceedings, is the contention that he was not allowed to consult counsel prior to the time he confessed to the crime. Counsel was appointed prior to his arraignment on February 11, 1960 (the trial was not until April 26, 1960), and he was represented by counsel in all subsequent proceedings.

If we assume without deciding that the decision of Escobedo *237 v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977 (June 22, 1964), is effective retrospectively, we think the case is readily distinguishable. In the instant case the confession was made on December 30, 1959, and the indictment was not until February 8, 1960. It was not alleged or shown that counsel was ever requested, or permission to consult counsel or others denied, at the time of the brief interrogation leading to the confession. According to the police, the suspect readily admitted his complicity in this and other crimes. That the confession itself was voluntary was established on the direct appeal. Cf. Hornes v. Warden, 235 Md. 673, 202 A. 2d 643.

Application denied.

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

Related

Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1966)
United States v. Richard Cone
354 F.2d 119 (Second Circuit, 1965)
Davis v. Maryland House of Correction
247 F. Supp. 869 (D. Maryland, 1965)
Campbell v. State
212 A.2d 747 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1965)
United States ex rel. Russo v. State of New Jersey
351 F.2d 429 (Third Circuit, 1965)
Cowans and Hayes v. State
209 A.2d 552 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1965)
Williams v. State
174 So. 2d 97 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
State v. Winsett
205 A.2d 510 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1964)
McCoy v. State
204 A.2d 565 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1964)
Green v. State
203 A.2d 870 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
203 A.2d 418, 236 Md. 236, 1964 Md. LEXIS 864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-warden-of-maryland-penitentiary-md-1964.