Church v. State

• Decision Date: 16 January 1969
• Docket Number: No. 141,141
• Citation: 248 A.2d 907,5 Md.App. 642
• Parties: Clifton CHURCH a/k/a Bernard Holland v. STATE of Maryland.
• Court: Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Page 642

5 Md.App. 642

248 A.2d 907

Clifton CHURCH a/k/a Bernard Holland v. STATE of Maryland.

No. 141.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland.

Jan. 16, 1969.

John D. Hackett, Baltimore, for appellant.

Donald Needle, Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom were Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., Charles E. Moylan, Jr., and Robert S. Fertitta, State's Atty. and Asst. State's Atty. for Baltimore City, Baltimore, on the brief, for appellee.

Before MURPHY, C. J., and ANDERSON, MORTON, ORTH and THOMPSON, JJ.

THOMPSON, Judge.

Clifton Church, the appellant, was convicted of armed robbery by the Criminal Court of Baltimore, Judge E. McMaster Duer presiding. He was sentenced to a term of twenty years. On appeal he alleges that his guilty plea was not knowingly made and that the sentence was cruel and excessive.

The statement of facts by the prosecutor showed that Church and another, both armed with pistols, entered the Colony Credit Corporation office in Baltimore, demanded money from two employees therein and stole more than $2300 in cash. He could have been identified by both employees. The circumstances surrounding the entry of the guilty plea are detailed in the record as follows:

'MR. HARRIS: The plea is guilty to the first count of the indictment. Mr. Church, is your plea of guilty being given voluntarily?

'MR. CHURCH: Yes, it is.

'MR. HARRIS: Has anybody offered you any promises or inducements in connection with your guilty plea?

'MR. CHURCH: No.

'MR. HARRIS: You understand when you plead guilty the rules of evidence are suspended and that all and any evidence can come in against you pertaining to those particular events?

'MR. CHURCH: Yes.

'MR. HARRIS: That you are subject to twenty years imprisonment, the maximum, you understand that?

'MR. CHURCH: Yes.

'MR. HARRIS: Why are you pleading guilty this morning?

'MR. CHURCH: Because I committed the robbery.

'THE COURT: I did not understand you.

'MR. CHURCH: Because I committed the robbery.

'MR. FERTITTA: The plea is acceptable to the State.

'THE COURT: Mr. Church, you understand that your rights have been fully explained to you by Mr. Harris, your counselor.

'MR. CHURCH: Yes, they have, Your Honor.

'THE COURT: That you have a right to come into this court on pleas of innocence.

'MR. CHURCH: I do.

'THE COURT: You know you have a right to enter a plea of not guilty and you have a right to trial by a jury of twelve persons.

'MR. CHURCH: Yes, sir.

'THE COURT: You still plead guilty and elect to be tried by me, the Court?

'MR. CHURCH: Yes, sir.

'THE COURT: And taking all that into consideration, you still enter a plea of guilty to robbery with a deadly weapon, is that correct?

'MR. CHURCH: Yes, I do. If I could, I would like to explain why.

'THE COURT: I will take your plea first, then I will hear from you and you can say anything you wish. On the first count of the indictment, the Court finds you guilty. The remaining counts of the indictment I presume are merged in this.

'MR. FERTITTA: Your Honor, they are either merged or are inconsistent with the guilty finding.

'THE COURT: What about the sixth count?

'MR. FERTITTA: The sixth count is larceny?

'THE COURT: Yes.

'MR. FERTITTA: Your Honor, I would assume that was merged.

'MR. HARRIS: It would be my impression, Your Honor, that a robbery is an aggravated larceny.

'THE COURT: All right. I will find him guilty under the first count. All right.'

Church seems to concede that his plea of guilty under the circumstances set out above would comply with the standards set down by the Court of Appeals in the case of James v. State, 242 Md. 424, 219 A.2d 17 and followed by this Court in Duvall v. State, 5 Md.App. 484, 248 A.2d 401, and in other cases such as Wayne v. State, 4 Md.App. 424, 429-30, 243 A.2d 19; but he alleges that this Court should lay down detailed standards as to the questions that should be asked by the trial judge as was done by the Michigan Court of Appeals in State v. Taylor, 9 Mich.App. 333, 155 N.W.2d 723 (1968) or as proposed by the American Bar Association project on minimum standards for criminal justice in its tentative draft on Pleas of Guilty or at least as required by Rule No. 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure as amended. We think that an accused's rights are adequately protected by the rule we have followed which, while requiring no specific ritual, does require the record show that the trial judge has satisfied himself of the voluntary character of the guilty plea and that the accused understand its nature and effect. If experience should dictate that an accused's rights should be further protected we think those standards should be established by statute or by rule of court so that trial judges would know in advance precisely what was required of them. Church, age thirty, does contend, however, that since the record shows that he went only to the seventh grade in vocational school he could not thoroughly...