Meadows v. State

Orth, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant came to trial in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County under an indictment charging escape. He pleaded guilty. The court rendered a verdict of guilty and sentence him to a term of one year “to run consecutive with any other sentences you are now required to serve for any prior convictions.” On appeal from the judgment the appellant contends that: I The plea of guilty a. did not “constitute a knowledgeable and intelligent plea”; b. it precluded the introduction by him of evidence bjr State’s witnesses which could have corroborated the facts alleged by him when he took the stand to show mitigation.

II He did not commit an escape within the meaning of the statute proscribing the crime. Ill His rights were denied because he did not know that he had a right to have his sentence reviewed by a Review Panel. ⁴⁴³ I a. In support of this contention the appellant alleges that he believed he would get a lighter sentence if he entered a plea of guilty. The record shows that the lower court made an examination of the appellant sufficient to show that the plea was free and voluntary.

The examination adduced that the appellant had discussed the plea with his counsel, that he realized that it was an admission that he escaped, that none of the State’s Attorney, the police or “anyone at the House of Correction” had made him any promises in consideration of his entering a guilty plea—“that you might get a lighter sentence or something of that nature”, that he was pleading freely and voluntarily, that he was 21 years of age and had graduated from high school. With regard to penalty, the record discloses : “COURT: And do you realize the penalty you can receive in this case ? DEFENDANT MEADOWS : Yes Sir. COURT: You can get up to 10 years in addition to whatever sentence you’re serving.

DEFENDANT MEADOWS: No sir, That is not what 1 was told. COURT: Well, that is what the penalty is. That is the maximum penalty. What were you told ?

DEFENDANT MEADOWS : Three years was the maximum. COURT: Well, that is the maximum if you are at the Maryland Correctional Institution at Hagerstown, not at the Maryland House of Correction.” 1 After the appellant answered all the questions with regard to the plea, the Court asked, “Do you still wish to plead guilty?” ■and the appellant replied, “Yes sir”. It is clear that before the verdict was entered, the appellant was fully informed as to the maximum penalty for the crime, and that there was no reason for him to expect a lighter sentence than one year, which ⁴⁴⁴ it is noted, was two years less than the penalty the appellant at first thought was the maximum for the offense. This contention is without merit.

See Blake v. State, 2 Md. App. 492 ; Gopshes v. State, 1 Md. App. 396 ; Charles v. State, 1 Md. App. 222 . b. The contention that “the entry of a plea of Guilty tended to-preclude the introduction into evidence by Appellant of evidence by State Officials which would have corroborated Appellant’s narrative of what transpired at the time of the Appellant’s purported offense” is frivolous. A statement of facts was presented to the court by stipulation. The appellant was afforded full opportunity to give his version of the escape and did sounder oath.

He made no request that other witnesses be called on his behalf. II The appellant contends that he did not escape from a lawful place of confinement as specified in Md. Code (1967 Repl. Vol.), Art. 27, § 139. He was serving a sentence of three years-in the Maryland House of Correction for housebreaking.

He was assigned to the engine room detail. He testified that he had been working outside of the institution for three days. On the day of his departure he had finished his work and “went back to the engine room”. He was standing outside the engine room when a truck drove up containing an inmate, who was-driving, and an officer.

The officer told him to get in the truck and they drove to Laurel to pick up some supplies. While they were loading the truck, the appellant asked permission to use the bathroom in a restaurant. He was granted permission but when he came back the truck was gone. He walked down Washington