Gladden v. State
| Decision Date | 21 December 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 121,121 |
| Parties | Vennie T. GLADDEN v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Lynn F. Meyers, Hagerstown, for appellant.
Thomas B. Finan, Atty. Gen., Edward S. Digges, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., and Robert S. Rothenhofer, State's Atty., for Frederick County, Frederick, for appellee.
Before HAMMOND, PRESCOTT, HORNEY, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.
This appeal is devoid of merit. The appellant entered pleas of nolo contendere to three informations, charging him with forgery and false pretenses, in the Circuit Court for Frederick County before Chief Judge Schnauffer, sitting without a jury. He received sentences that totaled two years and six months, and has appealed.
He contends that: (1) his pleas of nolo contendere were not made with a clear and intelligent understanding of their nature and effect; (2) he was denied that aid and advice of counsel; and (3) the sentences imposed were excessive and, therefore, cruel and unusual.
The appellant's court-appointed attorney raises these questins upon appellant's request, but, with commendable candor, concedes there is nothing in the record to support them. The record discloses that the learned and experienced trial judge carefully and fully explained to the appellant, who was no newcomer to the criminal courts, the nature and effect of his pleas. Parker v. Warden, 222 Md. 598, 158 A.2d 762. It discloses he specifically requested that no counsel be appointed for him at his trial; and no ingredient of unfairness entered into his trial. Dowling v. Warden, 211 Md. 645, 647, 127 A.2d 136. The sentences imposed were only a fraction of the statutory maximum, and certainly cannot be seriously considered as amounting to 'cruel and unusual' punishment. Hobbs v. Warden, 223 Md. 651, 653, 163 A.2d 331, 332.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cohen v. State
...of such a plea prior to its acceptance, we find no force to the appellant's assertion of lack of understanding. See Gladden v. State, 227 Md. 266, 176 A.2d 219 (1961). Since we find no error with respect to the issues properly before us, the judgment appealed from will be Judgment affirmed;......
-
Lifshutz v. State
...of the plea. In this case there was ample ground in the record for the lower court to reach the same conclusion. See Gladden v. State, 227 Md. 266, 176 A.2d 219 (1961) and Landaker v. State, 234 Md. 489, 200 A.2d 44 (1964). None of the authorities cited by the appellant, in our opinion, is ......
-
Martin v. State, 173
...defendant on the stand in his own defense, and the defendant's case was closed without any defense testimony. Gladden v. State, No. 121 September Term, 1961, Md., 176 A.2d 219; Brown v. State, 223 Md. 401, 164 A.2d His second contention is that the trial court was in error in finding the de......