Maryland case law › Williams v. Warden

Williams v. Warden

240 Md. 205 (1965) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: DeniedBarnes, J.✓ Good law
HoldingJames Williams pleaded guilty to rape in the Circuit Court for Dorchester County on March 13, 1952, and was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Barnes, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On March 13, 1952 James Williams, the applicant for leave to appeal from a denial by Judge Mace of his petition for relief under the Post Conviction Procedure Act (the applicant), was convicted of rape in the Circuit Court for Dorchester County, after a plea of guilty, and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Maryland Penitentiary. The applicant has sought post conviction relief in either Maryland or the federal courts some thirteen times in the thirteen years since his conviction. In many of his prior petitions for relief he has had the bene 207 fit of counsel and relief was denied after a full hearing with the applicant being present as a witness.

Judge Mace filed an opinion and dismissed applicant’s latest post conviction petition by an order dated April 1, 1965. This application for leave to appeal followed. The applicant alleges over fifty contentions in support of his petition for relief. In summary, the following contentions could possibly have merit: 1) illegal arrest, detention and police questioning, the use of perjured testimony at his trial and ineptitude of court appointed counsel during his trial, especially in respect to the entering of a guilty plea without applicant’s full authorization or understanding of its ramifications; 2) the applicant, without funds, did not have access to a transcript of his trial until February 28, 1964 when Judge Henry ordered that one be furnished him, applicant’s repeated prior requests for a transcript were denied so that “while all post trial proceedings have been adverse to him, all were conducted without the benefit of the court having before it for consideration the actual transcript of the trial” (applicant’s petition); 3) that applicant was denied equal protection of the law since Negroes (the applicant is a Negro) were systematically excluded from serving as members of the grand or petit juries in Dorchester County on or about the time of his indictment and trial.

All the questions in applicant’s first contention dealing with illegal arrest, detention, police practices, prejudice, perjury and conduct of counsel were previously and finally litigated in prior proceedings for post conviction relief. See the reported opinions in Williams v. Warden, 209 Md. 641 , 120 A. 2d 919 (1956), cert. den., 351 U. S. 974 , 76 S. C. 1037, 100 L. Ed. 1492 (1956); Williams v. Warden, 221 Md. 615 , 157 A. 2d 280 (1960); Williams v. Warden, 233 Md. 606 , 195 A. 2d 609 (1963). Applicant’s

This is a preview of Williams v. Warden. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.