G. L. S., Application of

Decision Date07 January 1982
Docket NumberNo. 8,8
Citation292 Md. 378,439 A.2d 1107
Parties, 30 A.L.R.4th 1000 In re Application of G. L. S. for Admission to the Bar of Maryland.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Argued before MURPHY, C. J., and SMITH, DIGGES, ELDRIDGE, COLE, DAVIDSON and RODOWSKY, JJ.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

G. L. S. (applicant) has applied for admission to the Bar of Maryland. In 1968, in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, the applicant pleaded guilty to the charge of armed robbery. Because we find convincing evidence of the applicant's full and complete rehabilitation and of his present good moral character, we shall order his admission.

The applicant was born in Baltimore City of teenage parents on 13 October 1947. At a very early age, he was placed in homes of relatives and subsequently in foster care On the evening of 8 October 1967, the applicant, while at a bar, met, for the first time, two men who planned to commit a bank robbery. The following day, these two men, each of whom was armed, entered the Lovettsville Branch of Farmers and Merchants National Bank of Hamilton in Lovettsville, Virginia, and took approximately $7,000 from the tellers' cages. The applicant, who was unarmed, was the driver of the get-away car.

homes. In 1964, at the age of 17, the applicant, then living in a foster care home, dropped out of the tenth grade and enlisted in the army, where he completed his high school education. On 22 September 1966, the applicant was honorably discharged with a rank of private. He was employed from October, 1966 until June, 1967 when he was laid off due to lack of work.

The applicant pleaded guilty to the charge of armed robbery and was sentenced to a 10-year term. He was incarcerated in a federal penitentiary for a period of six years. While incarcerated, the applicant was classified as a "management problem" and was repeatedly transferred from one federal penal institution to another. In prison, the applicant became an avid reader and participated in extension courses offered by the University of Georgia. On 17 May 1974 he was released and placed on parole.

Upon his release in 1974, the applicant returned to Baltimore and enrolled in Morgan State University. On 17 May 1975, he was married. While attending Morgan State, he was supported by his veteran's benefits, his own earnings, and his wife's earnings. After only three years, in May, 1977, he received a degree in political science. He attained a 3.4 average and was graduated "with Honor." His parole was successfully terminated approximately 13 months before his sentence expired.

In 1977, the applicant applied for admission to the University of Maryland School of Law. In response to a question on the application for admission requesting an account of activities or occupations for any time intervals between high school and entrance into college, the applicant listed "U.S "Thank you for this opportunity to explain my imprisonment. I anticipated that it would have serious consequences for my application to law school.

Federal Prison" for the period from 1967 to 1974. In response to a question whether he had ever been convicted of any crime other than a traffic violation, the applicant responded "yes." Subsequently, he was asked to explain the circumstances of his criminal activity. In a letter to the law school dated 4 March 1977, he responded:

"As you may well imagine, prison is a powerful influence in my life. Whatever enthusiasm-and I am enthused-I have developed for living I have done so as a result of that experience.

"But perhaps you are more interested in how I came to be a prisoner, so I would like to begin there. At 19, unmotivated and unconcerned, I robbed a bank in Loundon County, Virginia-an act of selfishness and alienation. I played a minor role-if anything can be minor about bank robbery. I drove the car used in the 'get-a-way.' I prefer not to analyze my motives, at least no farther than easy gain. My motives were confused, even then. But more importantly any explanation of motive would be more an excuse than a reason. At my trial I did not deny my guilt, nor do I deny it now; nor do I dismiss criminal action as a natural channel of the poor and oppressed, as was fashionable in the sixties and seventies. I prefer instead to call a spade a spade; and work on my life in a way that may perhaps mitigate what has been.

"Once prison had forced change upon my life, each new event came automatic. Because I had the time and the need to understand, I began to read. Influenced by the times, I became what is now referred to as political, that is, I began to act and react in a pattern that challenged authority: I opposed myself to prison, and for that opposition, I spent six and one-half years in prison. I was sent to prison "I decided on college in prison, and began that resolve with extension courses from the University of Georgia. It was almost inevitable that I would return to Baltimore, attend Morgan State University and study Political Science. And it was as inevitable that once involved in the Political Science Department that I would turn to law.

because I robbed a bank, I was kept because I could not conform, or would not. But I read, and as I read living grew in importance. It became an end in itself: not the quantity of life, but its quality. The more I learned of living the more I wanted to live the more I wanted that life to be full and involved.

"As an attestment I have attempted to educate myself. The task is far from complete, I know. But in less than three years I have completed 128 credits of undergraduate work, with an estimated average of 3.4. I request admission into the University of Maryland with the conviction to work harder. The past cannot be mitigated, but a man's life can. If given the opportunity to study, I will do so gladly and with aggression and enthusiasm. Gentlemen, I can achieve. I ask only for the chance."

Thereafter, the applicant was admitted to the University of Maryland School of Law. While there, he was employed by the Legal Aid Bureau, the Prisoners' Assistance Project, and the Office of the Attorney General. He was graduated in May, 1980 and in November, 1980 was employed by Foster, Matthews and Hill, P. A. as a law clerk.

On an application signed 20 May 1980, he applied for admission to the Bar of Maryland. Two questions on the character questionnaire are significant here.

Question 5 of the character questionnaire stated:

"The following constitutes every residence, address and place (with zip code) where I have lived within the last 10 years.

FROM TO

City Street Month Month

and and and and

State Number Year Year" In response, the applicant listed his residences between the years 1974 and 1980. He did not list any "residence, address and place" where he had lived for the years 1970 to 1974, during which period he was incarcerated.

Question 11 of the character questionnaire stated:

"The following is a complete record of all criminal proceedings (including traffic violations other than an occasional parking violation) to which I am or have ever been a party: (If 'None' so state)

In response, under the heading "Date" the applicant placed "11/67" and under the heading "Court" the applicant placed "U. S. District Ct. for the District of Maryland." Under the headings "Nature of Proceedings" and "Disposition" the applicant provided no information.

On 26 August 1980, a member of the Character Committee for the Eighth Judicial Circuit (Committee) interviewed the applicant. On 10 October 1980, she made a recommendation and report to the Committee in which she stated:

"I have reviewed responses to inquiries in regard to (G. L. S.) and Mr. (S.' s) Application for admission to the Bar. I have also had a personal interview with Mr. (S.). I cannot recommend Mr. (S.) for admission because he failed to give complete answers to questions 5 and 11 on the Application. In my personal interview with Mr. (S.), he stated that he had been convicted of a felony in the U. S. District Court, District of Maryland and sentenced to ten years in prison. In my view this Application must be reviewed by the Committee."

On 26 March 1981, the Committee held a hearing to inquire into the criminal charge of which the applicant was convicted in 1968; to determine whether the applicant had adequately disclosed his conviction on his application; and to determine whether the applicant had been rehabilitated. After hearing testimony from the applicant and a number of character witnesses, and considering numerous letters of recommendation from friends, employers and teachers, including the Dean of the University of Maryland School of Law, the Committee found that the answers to Questions 5 and 11 were adequate because they furnished sufficient information to alert the Committee to the need for further investigation and inquiry. In addition, they found that the applicant was rehabilitated and possessed good moral character. Accordingly, the Committee unanimously recommended to the State Board of Law Examiners (Board) that the applicant be admitted to the Bar of Maryland.

On 5 June 1981, the Board held a hearing. The applicant was repeatedly asked to explain his responses to Questions 5 and 11. With respect to Question 5, requiring a list of every residence, address and place where the applicant lived within the last 10 years, the applicant indicated that his failure to provide any information for the years from 1970 to 1974 occurred because he did not consider the federal penitentiary a residence or a place where he lived. Illustrative of his explanation is the following:

"When I was asked to list my residences for ten years I stopped at 1974 because I had no reason to believe that the U. S. Federal Penitentiary was a residence of mine. I never considered it a residence. I never considered it a place where I lived. I always considered it a place that I...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Prager, Matter of
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 15 Febrero 1996
    ...649 A.2d 589, 590 (D.C.App.1994) (guilty plea ten years earlier when applicant was twenty-one years old); In re Application of G.L.S., 292 Md. 378, 397, 439 A.2d 1107 (1982) (driver of get-away car in bank robbery was nineteen years old at time of incident and convicted fourteen years prior......
  • In re Manville
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • 28 Junio 1985
    ...367 (Okl. 1981). 11. Accord In re Application of James G., 296 Md. 310, 312, 462 A.2d 1198, 1200-01 (1983); In re Application of G.L.S., 292 Md. 378, 392, 439 A.2d 1107, 1115 (1982); In re Application of A.T., 286 Md. 507, 513, 408 A.2d 1023, 1027-28 (1979); Application of David H., 283 Md.......
  • Matter of GLS
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • 5 Abril 1984
    ...possesses good private and professional character. Factual Background The facts of this case are set forth in detail in In re G.L.S., 292 Md. 378, 439 A.2d 1107 (1982). They are summarized After an honorable discharge from the United States Army in 1966, G.L.S. was employed until he was lai......
  • Application of Strzempek
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 30 Diciembre 2008
    ...M., 313 Md. 168, 178, 545 A.2d 7, 12 (1988); In re Application of Maria C., 294 Md. 538, 451 A.2d 655 (1982); In re Application of G.L.S., 292 Md. 378, 439 A.2d 1107 (1982); In the Matter of the Application of A.T., 286 Md. 507, 515, 408 A.2d 1023, 1028 (1979). See also In re Sanderson, 387......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT