Riggleman v. State, 1284
| Citation | 33 Md.App. 344,364 A.2d 1159 |
| Decision Date | 19 October 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 1284,1284 |
| Parties | Harry Edward RIGGLEMAN, Sr. v. STATE of Maryland. |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Leslie J. Clark, Assigned Public Defender, Cumberland, for appellant.
Bernard A. Raum, Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom were Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., Lawrence V. Kelly, State's Atty., for Allegany County and Robert W. Hamilton, Deputy State's Atty., for Allegany County on the brief, for appellee.
Argued before MENCHINE, LOWE and MELVIN, JJ.
On November 14, 1975, the appellant, Harry Edward Riggleman, Sr., was brought to trial before a jury in the Circuit Court for Allegany County on a two-count criminal information charging him with larceny of two automobiles. He was found guilty on each count and received a three year sentence on each count, to be served consecutively. He seeks reversal of the judgments of conviction on three grounds. Because we shall reverse the judgments of conviction and remand the case for a new trial we need only consider two: 1) the sufficiency of the evidence, and 2) the propriety of the court's action in striking appellant's insanity plea.
The evidence was clearly sufficient to support the convictions. Appellant's statements to a State Trooper that he did indeed steal the automobiles were received in evidence without objection. There was ample corroboration of the corpus delicti.
The criminal information was filed on June 26, 1975. When appellant was arraigned on July 2, 1975, he filed as his only plea the following written 'Plea of Insanity':
'For pleas to the informations (sic) in the above cases (sic), the defendant, Harry E. Riggleman, pursuant to Article 59, Section 23 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, alleges that he was insane at the time of the commission of the alleged crimes'. (Emphasis added.)
On the same date, July 2, 1975, the court signed an order (obviously submitted by appellant's counsel) committing appellant 'to Springfield State Hospital . . . for the purpose of undergoing a complete psychiatric examination and evaluation by the medical staff of said hospital'. It was further ordered 'that a complete psychiatric report will be prepared by said medical staff from the basis of said examination and evaluation in accordance with the provisions of Article 59, Section 23 of the Annotated Code of Maryland.' (Emphasis added. 1)
Under the judge's signature on the order appears this handwritten statement: . As the judge later remarked, '. . . (N)o such precautions were apparently taken'.
On November 5, 1975, the State filed a 'Motion for Appropriate Relief' asking the court to 'dismiss the Insanity plea' or in the alternative to 'grant that relief which the Court deems appropriate in the premises'. The motion alleged the following:
1. On June 5, 1975, HARRY EDWARD RIGGLEMAN, SR., hereinafter referred to as Defendant, was arrested and charged with two counts of larceny of motor vehicle. On or about June 26, 1975, following a preliminary hearing, an information charging said offenses was filed in this Honorable Court.
2. On July 2, 1975, the Defendant was arraigned and entered pleas of insanity in these cases. On the same dates, the Court signed an order committing the Defendant to Springfield State Hospital for examination and report (the State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene having indicated the examination had to be conducted there). On July 3, 1975, the Defendant was transported to Springfield Hospital for psychiatric examination. On or about July 4, 1975, the Defendant escaped from the hospital. On August 16, 1975, the Defendant was returned to Springfield by a police officer. On August 18, 1975, the Defendant fled, having escaped for the second time. Due to the Defendant's having removed himself, no examination was conducted. On or about September 18, 1975, the Defendant was apprehended by Pennsylvania authorities and incarcerated in the Somerset County, Pennsylvania, Jail. The Defendant refused to waive extradition unless the State agreed to return him to Springfield State Hospital which the State declined to do, and was returned to this jurisdiction on October 14, 1975, following an extradition hearing in Pennsylvania.
3. The State has attempted, without success at this time, to arrange a psychiatric examination in Allegany County by a private psychiatrist who would be paid by the State.
4. At no time has the Defendant adduced any evidence which would provide a basis for an insanity plea. The State alleges the plea in this case is frivolous, being without any factual basis, and is pursued for the purpose of delay or further escape. This case has been scheduled for trial in this Honorable Court on November 14, 1975.
WHEREFORE, your Petitioner prays the Court to conduct a hearing and grant the appropriate relief requested.'
On November 5, 1975, a copy of the motion was served on appellant at the Allegany County jail and a copy mailed to his counsel. A hearing on the motion was held two days later on November 7. At the hearing, the State's Attorney recited to the court the allegations in the motion and announced that appellant's counsel had . He concluded his opening remarks by saying, . At this point, appellant's counsel said to the court:
In his testimony, appellant denied the allegation that he 'refused to waive extradition unless the State agreed to return him to Springfield', saying that he only 'told them I would not come back to Maryland'. He also testified that he had an appointment with Dr. Franklin on November 10; that Dr. Franklin, who he said was 'an ear, nose and throat specialist', had told him that he had 'an abscess down under the ear drum, the inner ear drum, that puts pressure on the brain' and that was why he filed his plea of insanity; that he had 'been in the hospital for blacking out spells'; that he has had nine 'blackout spells' since 1974; and that he escaped from Springfield because he 'was more or less afraid that they would go cutting on me down there'.
It appears that when appellant was returned to Maryland on October 14, 1975, following his second escape on August 18, 1975, he was not returned to Springfield State Hospital, but to the Allegany County jail. There is nothing in the record authorizing his transfer from the hospital to the jail. Presumably the State did not wish him to return to Springfield for fear he might again escape. The court asked the State's Attorney, 'Would it be feasible or possible to have the Defendant examined by a local psychiatrist in custody here, Mr. Kelly?' Mr. Kelly (the State's Attorney for Allegany County) answered:
'I might say with regard to that, Your Honor, that the State has been working for approximately two months, not generally with Mr. Riggleman's case, although this points out dramatically the failure in our whole-in the structure of things. That is, committing people to Springfield. We've had I believe this year five individuals committed, of which four have escaped, Mr. Riggleman being one. I have attempted to do that. At this point we have no psychiatrists that will agree to that. I'm hopeful that in the future, the immediate future hopefully, that we will be in such position.
But, frankly, Your Honor, we would in Mr. Riggleman's case rely simply on the fact that his case has been handled as cases since the beginning of time in Allegany County. And, Frankly, while we're willing to change the system generally, I'm not particularly willing to change the system to meet Mr. Riggleman's particular situation. And we would rely on the state of the case as it presently is. Although, frankly, we hope in a month or so to be in a position where we can conduct our own mental examinations here in Allegany County rather than to rely on the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. But at this time that simply isn't true, Your Honor.'
At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing judge granted the motion to strike, giving as his reasons: 1) The 'only purpose of (appellant's) seeking confinement at Springfield is for the purpose of evading and avoiding the trial on the merits, and that the Defendant doesn't sincerely and genuinely seek any psychiatric examination and evaluation to determine his mental condition'; 2) ; and 3) 'I think the Defendant is merely attempting to evade and avoid trial on the merits'.
The appellant was then re-arraigned. He was asked by the clerk, 'What is your plea guilty or not guilty?' He answe...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Treece v. State
...List v. State, 18 Md.App. 578, 586-587, 308 A.2d 451, 456 (1973), vacated, 271 Md. 367, 316 A.2d 824 (1974); Riggleman v. State, 33 Md.App. 344, 350-351, 364 A.2d 1159, 1163 (1976). Its most fully articulated explanation for this view is found in Judge Scanlan's opinion in White. The positi......
-
Williams v. Superintendent, Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center
...Vel non, it is incumbent upon the State to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the sanity of the defendant. Riggleman v. State, 33 Md.App. 344, 351-52, 364 A.2d 1159, 1163-64 (1976); Strawderman v. State, supra, 4 Md.App. at 697-98, 224 A.2d at 892-93. Defense counsel, on the other hand, ende......
-
People v. Hill
...2 F.3d 999, 1015 n. 16 (10th Cir.1993); Yocum v. State, 325 Ark. 180, 925 S.W.2d 385, 390 (1996); Riggleman v. State, 33 Md.App. 344, 364 A.2d 1159, 1164 (Spec.App.1976); People v. Savoie, 419 Mich. 118, 349 N.W.2d 139, 143 (1984); see also Leach, 911 F.2d at 1256 (collecting ...
-
Dorsey v. Solomon
...of the alleged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Maryland Code Ann. art. 59, § 25 (Repl.Vol.1972); See Riggleman v. State, 33 Md.App. 344, 364 A.2d 1159, 1163-64 (1976); Strawderman v. State, 4 Md.App. 689, 244 A.2d 888, 893 (1968). When a defendant is acquitted by reason of insanity, the ......