Herd v. State, No. 280
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
| Writing for the Court | Submitted to GILBERT; GILBERT |
| Citation | 37 Md.App. 362,377 A.2d 574 |
| Parties | Calvin HERD v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Docket Number | No. 280 |
| Decision Date | 14 September 1977 |
Page 362
v.
STATE of Maryland.
[377 A.2d 575]
Page 363
Alan H. Murrell, Public Defender and Victoria A. Salner, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.Submitted to GILBERT, C. J., and MOYLAN and MASON, JJ.
GILBERT, Chief Judge.
In this, hopefully, the last appeal arising out of Patuxent Institution, we have been presented with a joint motion by the appellant, Calvin Herd, and the State, through the Attorney General, to reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court for Charles County. We shall comply with the joint interpellation and reverse the judgment.
Before recounting the facts from which this case arose, the Court acknowledges the spirit of fairness in which the Attorney General's office, in the person of Bruce C. Spizler, Esq., entered into the motion in the obvious interest of justice. Mr. Spizler is apparently cognizant of the old adage that the State wins when justice prevails.
We turn now to a brief discussion of the facts of this matter.
On March 23, 1976, appellant was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Albert D. Herd, Jr., and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. The appellant was ordered to be referred to Patuxent Institution for evaluation as a possible defective delinquent. Thereafter, a petition was filed against appellant on February 15, 1977, alleging that he was in contempt of court for his failure to cooperate with the Patuxent psychiatrists. At a subsequent hearing on the petition, the appellant was adjudged to be in contempt, and he was sentenced, therefor, to ten years imprisonment, the term to run consecutively to the manslaughter sentence.
There are at least two reasons why this judgment must be reversed, and we, thus, see no reason to discuss all the issues raised.
Appellant argues that the "offense, if any, is a civil contempt." We agree.
Page 364
The Maryland courts have consistently held that failure to cooperate with Patuxent Institution doctors constitutes only a civil contempt. Williams & Fulwood v. Director, 276 Md. 272, 313, 347 A.2d 179, 192 (1975); Meyers v. State, 23 Md.App. 275, 277-78, 326 A.2d 773, 775 (1974). See Savage v. State, 19 Md.App. 1, 15, 308 A.2d 701, 709 (1973).
In Meyers, we pointed out that:
"The distinction between civil and criminal contempt is ofttimes hazy, but, nevertheless, real. In a civil contempt case the punishment is remedial and can be avoided by compliance with the court order. A civil contempt proceeding is 'intended to coerce future compliance.' Consequently, the penalty in a civil contempt case 'must provide for purging.' State v. Roll . . . (267 Md. 714, 298 A.2d 867 (1973)). A criminal contempt, on the other hand, imposes a penalty for past misconduct." 23 Md.App. at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gluckstern v. Sutton, No. 107
...Fulwood v. Director, 276 Md. 272, 347 A.2d 179 (1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 976, 96 S.Ct. 2178, 48 L.Ed.2d 801 (1976); Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 377 A.2d 574 (1977); Comment, 22 Am.Univ.L.Rev. 619 3 Art. 31B, § 9(b), stated as follows: "(b) When defendant found to be a defective deli......
-
Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Washington Nat. Arena, MARYLAND-NATIONAL
...Court of Special Appeals, which, for reasons to be discussed below, vacated the chancellor's order and dismissed the bill of complaint. 37 Md.App. at 362, 354 A.2d 459. Only the Commission and Prince George's County sought further review in this Raising the issue on its own initiative, and ......
-
Rawlings v. Rawlings, No. 26
...relates to affording the defendant "the chance to rid him or herself of guilt and thus clear himself of the charge." Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 377 A.2d 574, 576 (1977). According to Black's Law Dictionary 1236 (6th Ed.1990), to "purge" is "[t]o cleanse; to clear. To clear or exonerate ......
-
Jones v. State, No. 80
...rid him or herself of guilt and thus clear himself of the charge.' " Lynch, 342 Md. at 520, 677 A.2d at 589-90 (quoting Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 365, 377 A.2d 574, 576 (1977)). In this way, a civil contemnor is said to have the keys to the prison in his own pocket. In re Nevitt, 117 F......
-
Gluckstern v. Sutton, No. 107
...Fulwood v. Director, 276 Md. 272, 347 A.2d 179 (1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 976, 96 S.Ct. 2178, 48 L.Ed.2d 801 (1976); Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 377 A.2d 574 (1977); Comment, 22 Am.Univ.L.Rev. 619 3 Art. 31B, § 9(b), stated as follows: "(b) When defendant found to be a defective deli......
-
Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Washington Nat. Arena, MARYLAND-NATIONAL
...Court of Special Appeals, which, for reasons to be discussed below, vacated the chancellor's order and dismissed the bill of complaint. 37 Md.App. at 362, 354 A.2d 459. Only the Commission and Prince George's County sought further review in this Raising the issue on its own initiative, and ......
-
Rawlings v. Rawlings, No. 26
...relates to affording the defendant "the chance to rid him or herself of guilt and thus clear himself of the charge." Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 377 A.2d 574, 576 (1977). According to Black's Law Dictionary 1236 (6th Ed.1990), to "purge" is "[t]o cleanse; to clear. To clear or exonerate ......
-
Jones v. State, No. 80
...rid him or herself of guilt and thus clear himself of the charge.' " Lynch, 342 Md. at 520, 677 A.2d at 589-90 (quoting Herd v. State, 37 Md.App. 362, 365, 377 A.2d 574, 576 (1977)). In this way, a civil contemnor is said to have the keys to the prison in his own pocket. In re Nevitt, 117 F......