Magrogan v. Warden, Maryland House of Correction
| Citation | 299 A.2d 460,16 Md.App. 675 |
| Decision Date | 29 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 95,95 |
| Parties | James Randolph MAGROGAN v. WARDEN, MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION. Post Conviction App. |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Floyd L. Parks, Chestertown, for appelicant.
Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., and J. Thomas Clark, State's Atty. for Queen Anne's County, for respondent.
Before ORTH, C. J., and MORTON and POWERS, JJ.
James Randolph Magrogan applies for leave to appeal from an order of Judge James A. Wise in the Circuit Court for Queen Anne's County denying post conviction relief.
Applicant pleaded guilty to two charges of grand larceny on 4 March 1971. On the same day the court imposed two concurrent sentences of four years each, but suspended the execution of the sentences and placed applicant on probation.
At a hearing held on 20 January 1972 the probation was revoked, the suspension stricken, and execution of the sentences placed in effect. Applicant did not appeal from the revocation order, and he does not contest it now. He employed the post conviction procedure to raise the single issue of credit for 'street time' upon revocation of probation.
Applicant contends that he was illegally and unconstitutionally denied credit against his sentence for the time he spent on probation in the community, because during that time he was subject to certain restraints upon his freedom. He cites no authority for this position except one decision by the Supreme Court of New Mexico, 1 but we find that decision to have been based upon a statute of that State. The question has not been referred to in any reported appellate decision in Maryland.
Suspension of imposition or of execution of sentence and the grant of probation are authorized by Code, Art. 27, §§ 639 to 642. Probation is defined in Code, Art. 41, § 107(f), but there is no general law governing the revocation of probation. A person alleged to have violated his probation is entitled to notice and a hearing at which he must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to defend himself. Edwardsen v. State, 220 Md. 82, 151 A.2d 132; Brown v. State, 4 Md.App. 623, 244 A.2d 471; Wilson v. State, 6 Md.App. 397, 251 A.2d 379, and Knight v. State, 7 Md.App. 313, 255 A.2d 441, in which the subject is thoroughly discussed. He has the right to appeal from a revocation of probation. Coleman v. State, 231 Md. 220, 189 A.2d 616.
The Court of Appeals, in Coleman v. State, supra, observed:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Christian v. State
...punishment could not be imposed; for example, credit for time spent on probation was not allowed. Magrogan v. Warden, Maryland House of Correction, 16 Md.App. 675, 299 A.2d 460 (1973). These rather inflexible rules became the subject of legislative modification. By Ch. 626, Laws of 1978, § ......
-
Nelson v. State
...imposed sentence is stricken, then that sentence goes into effect, exactly as it was originally imposed." Magrogan v. Warden, 16 Md.App. 675, 677, 299 A.2d 460 (1973). See Coleman v. State, 231 Md. 220, 189 A.2d 616 (1963). 3 It may not be modified upward, which occurs when a concurrent sen......
-
State v. Johnson
...1327, September Term, 1977, filed July 11, 1978. The court held that under the reasoning of its prior decision in Magrogan v. Warden, 16 Md.App. 675, 299 A.2d 460 (1973) and the opinion of this Court in Coleman v. State, 231 Md. 220, 189 A.2d 616 (1963), the trial court "correctly stated it......
-
Mitchell v. State, 748
...probation, reimposed the original sentence, and ordered appellant to pay restitution. We note our holding in Magrogan v. Warden, 16 Md.App. 675, 677, 299 A.2d 460 (1973): "The Court of Appeals, in Coleman v. State [231 Md. 220, 189 A.2d 616] ... 'When the sentence in a criminal case is impo......