Edwards v. State

WILNER, Judge. On February 1, 1985, appellant was convicted in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City of unlawfully carrying a handgun and possession of marijuana. For the handgun offense, appellant received a suspended sentence and probation for one year; for the marijuana offense, he received probation for one year (to run concurrently) pursuant to Md.Code Ann. art. 27, § 292. Each Order for Probation consisted of a preprinted form having numbered paragraphs.

The applicable blanks and boxes were filled in by hand. The Order for Probation on the handgun violation required appellant to pay a fine and court costs totaling $360. Paragraphs 9 through 10 of the filled-in order form are reproduced below: “9. Shall pay, through the Sheriffs Department the sum of $............... as follows: 03 Court costs of $.....IfPr................................; m Pine of $............?§Pr................................; In such installments as the Sheriffs Department shall determine and direct or; In installments of $............... per ............tJPMh.... 9A Shall pay through the Division of Parole and Probation the sum of $____....... as follows: □ Attorney fee of $............... to ....................... whose address is ......................................... □ Restitution of $............... to ......................... whose address is .........................................

In such installments as the Division shall determine and direct or; In installments of $............... per ....................... 10. Special conditions as follows: Pay fine & costs thru Prob 2/Í/86.......» ²⁷⁸ For his marijuana conviction, appellant was ordered to pay $50 in court costs. The relevant portion of that Order for Probation provided: #75235 [ 1 ] "9. Shall pay, through the Division of Parole and Probation, the sum of $ §9r.....................as follows: [XI Court costs of $ ?Pr............................. □ Fine of $....................; □ Attorney fee of $.................... to ........ whose address is ...............................

D Restitution of $.................... to .......... whose address is ............................... Q In such installments as the Division shall determine and direct or; □ In installments of $.................... per ... 10. Special conditions as follows: Pay costs thru Prob Both order forms, as can be seen, contained provisions permitting or requiring installment payments. The boxes and spaces next to those provisions, however, were in each case left blank.

Moreover, there appears under the “Special Conditions” paragraph of the first Order (Paragraph 10) the handwritten instruction that the fine and costs were to be paid “by 2/1/86” (one year from the date of the Order). Notwithstanding the sentencing judge’s disinclination to order installment payments by checking either the penultimate or the last box in Paragraph 9A of the one Order or Paragraph 9 of the other, the Division of Parole and Probation, on its own, directed appellant to pay the $360 assessment in installments of $40 per month and the $50 assessment at the rate of $10 per month. Payments according to that schedule would have resulted in full payment of the $360 obligation in nine months, and full payment of the $50 obligation in five months. Thus, the schedule set up by ²⁷⁹ Parole and Probation required appellant to discharge the $360 obligation well before the February 1, 1986 date set in the order.

Appellant failed to adhere to the payment schedule; as a result, on July 24, 1985, the Division of Parole and Probation filed a “Notice of Violation of Probation” for each offense. The notices stated, respectively, that appellant had violated the conditions of his probation by his “JfJailure to pay, through the Division of Parole and Probation, the sum of $360.00 in full,” and his “[fjailure to pay as ordered $50.00 court costs.” A violation of probation hearing took place two weeks later, before Judge Hammerman, who had originally sentenced appellant. From a colloquy between the judge and the State’s sole witness—an agent for the Division of Parole and Probation—it appears that the judge mistakenly believed that he, rather than the Division, had ordered appellant to make payments on a monthly basis: “THE COURT: He was to pay on a monthly basis, Agent Allen? THE WITNESS: In the case for the handgun violation, Your Honor, you indicated that you wanted the fine and costs to be paid through probation by 2/1/86; however, a payment plan was set up for [appellant]— THE COURT: Yes, meaning the end of his probationary period.

He was placed on probation just for a one-year period on the marijuana charge, and it had to be paid by the expiration of that probationary period. THE WITNESS: That’s correct, but a payment— THE COURT: But did I not say that in both cases that the court costs and the fine on the one