Shipley v. State

Anderson, J., by special assignment, delivered the opinion of the Court. On April 11, 1957, in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, four indictments were returned charging the appellant, Walter R. Shipley, with robbery with a deadly weapon, larceny, burglary, and carrying a deadly weapon. Upon pleas of guilty to all of the charges, Judge Warnken sentenced the appellant to 22 years in the Maryland Penitentiary. Appellant was without benefit of counsel at his arraignment and trial.

On September 19, 1963, appellant filed a petition for habeas corpus in the same court and, because he had not been represented by counsel at the first trial, his convictions were set aside and a new trial was granted. Counsel was appointed to represent appellant at the new trial, and on December 17, 1963, before Judge Sodaro, appellant was arraigned and guilty pleas were entered in his behalf by his counsel. Appellant was closely questioned as to whether he understood the charges against him. He himself then pleaded guilty to each indictment.

Judge Sodaro sentenced appellant to a total of 15 years in the Maryland Penitentiary, to commence as of the day of his arrest. From these convictions and sentences the appellant has appealed. At the time of this appeal, appellant’s then counsel, Mr. Adler, was allowed to withdraw his appearance from the case and Mr. James Beach was appointed by the court to prosecute the appeal. The appellant originally noted his appeal in proper person, setting forth four contentions.

Subsequently, the court appointed counsel on appeal contended that the trial of this case amounted to a denial of due process and a violation of appellant’s constitutional rights because (a) his illegal arrest in 1957 was followed by an unreasonable detention before charges were placed ; (b) there was no counsel at the 1957 trial; (c) the court failed ⁴¹¹ to grant the relief prayed for on the writ of habeas corpus, i.e., prayer for release instead of the new trial that was granted; and (d) the second trial was illegal. The case was submitted on briefs without argument. There can be no merit in the contention that there was an illegal arrest in 1957 followed by an unreasonable detention before charges were placed. The law is that an officer may lawfully arrest without a warrant and search the accused if a misdemeanor has been committed in his presence or where he has reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed a felony.

Braxton v. State, 234 Md. 1 . Appellant was arrested