Edwards v. State, 371
| Decision Date | 27 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 371,371 |
| Citation | 7 Md.App. 327,254 A.2d 719 |
| Parties | William Frederick EDWARDS v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Hugh L. Reilly, Hyattsville, for appellant.
Bernard L. Silbert, Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom were Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., Arthur A. Marshall, Jr., and Benjamin R. Wolman, State's Atty., and Asst. State's Atty., for Prince George's County, respectively, on brief for appellee.
Before MURPHY, C. J., and ANDERSON, MORTON, ORTH and THOMPSON, JJ.
William Frederick Edwards, the appellant, was sentenced to a term of nine years after pleading guilty to robbery in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, Judge Ernest A. Loveless presiding. On appeal, he contends that the plea was involuntary, and, therefore, the trial judge should have permitted its withdrawal.
Although Maryland has long followed the rule, recently enunciated by the Supreme Court, that there is reversible error where the record does not disclose that the defendant voluntarily and understandingly entered his guilty plea, Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, filed June 2, 1969, this record shows clearly that the plea was voluntary. Maryland authorities are collected in Church v. State, 5 Md.App. 642, 248 A.2d 907 and Cooper v. State, 5 Md.App. 638, 248 A.2d 905. It is contended that the plea was involuntary because of two factors: (1) Edwards had an I.Q. of 76, and (2) The State's Attorney agreed to nolle prosequi other counts in the indictment in return for the guilty plea. We will discuss each of the contentions separately.
In Cooper v. State, supra and Church v. State, supra, we decided that persons with only a seventh grade education would not be held incapable of entering a guilty plea on that issue alone; and we do not think an I.Q. of 76 would make for a different rule, particularly since the pre-sentence report showed that Edwards completed the eighth grade of a military academy with a 75 average grade.
Edwards argues that since one of the Assistant State's Attorneys and his counsel agreed that several counts of the indictment, including armed robbery, would be dismissed if he should plead guilty to robbery, the plea was the result of a bargain and not voluntary. He cites no authority condemning this general practice, and we know of no case which was reversed solely on this ground. The discussion in the American Bar Association Project on Minimum Standards for Criminal Justice in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Covington v. State
- Covington v. State
-
State v. Lambert, 20214
...does not mean that he was unable to understand the proceedings. People v. Mims, 42 Ill.2d 441, 248 N.E.2d 92 (1969); Edwards v. State, 7 Md.App. 327, 254 A.2d 719 (1969); State v. Place, 25 Ohio App.2d 158, 267 N.E.2d 832 (1971). A test for competency to plead guilty is no more stringent th......
-
Silverberg v. Warden, Md. Penitentiary, 77
...is reversible error where the record does not disclose that the defendant voluntarily and knowingly entered his guilty plea. Edwards v. State, Md.App., 254 A.2d 719, decided 27 June 1969. The question is whether the record here discloses that the guilty pleas were intelligent and voluntary ......