Treadway v. Warden, Md. Penitentiary
| Decision Date | 29 June 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 134,134 |
| Citation | 243 Md. 680,220 A.2d 907 |
| Parties | William M. TREADWAY v. WARDEN, MARYLAND PENITENTIARY. Post Conviction |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Before HAMMOND, HORNEY, MARBURY, BARNES, and McWILLIAMS, JJ.
William M. Treadway (applicant) seeks leave to appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Washington County (Rutledge, J.) denying relief under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act. On March 19, 1965 the applicant, represented by court appointed counsel, entered a plea of guilty before Judge McLaughlin to the charge of armed robbery. He was originally sentenced to ten years in the Maryland Penitentiary, but his counsel was subsequently seccessful in having the sentence reduced to seven years.
The applicant raised four contentions in his petition for post conviction relief: 1) That he was illegally indicted because members of the grand jury were unconstitutionally required to profess a belief in the existence of a Supreme Being as a condition precedent to service on that panel; 2) That his court appointed attorney was incompetent and had failed to advise him of the anture of his guilty plea; 3) That he was illegally arrested; and 4) That he was held incommunicado after his arrest, he was denied assistance of counsel during that period, and while being held by the police he confessed to the crime of which he was charged.
The applicant's first contention, though raised in his petition for post conviction relief, was not ruled on by the trial court. It can be summarily disposed of, however, here in this Court. The applicant's conviction became final before October 11, 1965, the date Schowgurow v. State, 240 Md. 121, 213 A.2d 475 (1965) was decided. Relief, therefore, which would be available to some under Schowgurow is not available to the applicant in this case. Thomas v. Warden, 241 Md. 730, 217 A.2d 356 (1966).
In regard to the applicant's second contention (incompetency of counsel) the trial court found that his attorney consulted with him prior to trial and fully explained his rights. The applicant chose to plead guilty at his trial, and after a thorough examination at the post conviction hearing, the trial court was satisfied that the applicant understood the charges against him and had pled quilty voluntarily. At the post conviction hearing the applicant himself expressed satisfaction with the conduct of counsel at his trial.
The applicant's third and fourth contentions of illegal arrest and illegal...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bruno v. State
...nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings. See Sutton v. State, 289 Md. 359, 365, 424 A.2d 755, 758-59 (1981); Treadway v. Warden, 243 Md. 680, 682, 220 A.2d 907, 908 (1966); Deyermond v. State, 19 Md.App. 698, 706, 313 A.2d 709, 714 (1974) ("[A]ny error in the trial court's denial of [d......
-
Sutton v. State
...July 3, 1973, an accused who pleads guilty ordinarily waives all nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings. Treadway v. Warden, 243 Md. 680, 682, 220 A.2d 907, 908 (1966). See Stevenson v. State, 37 Md.App. 635, 638, 378 A.2d 209, 211 (1977). It is because of these significant consequenc......
-
Levitt v. State of Md. Deposit Ins. Fund Corp.
...defects in the proceedings, except jurisdiction. Sutton v. State, 289 Md. 359, 365, 424 A.2d 755, 758-759 (1981); Treadway v. Warden, 243 Md. 680, 682, 220 A.2d 907, 908 (1966); Stevenson v. State, 37 Md.App. 635, 638, 378 A.2d 209, 211 (1977). See Deyermond v. State, 19 Md.App. 698, 703, 3......
-
Deyermond v. State, 383
...made, operates as a 'conviction of the highest order' and constitutes a waiver of all non-jurisdictional defects, Treadway v. Warden, 243 Md. 680, 220 A.2d 907, including the defects inherent in an illegally elicited confession, McCoy v. Warden, 234 Md. 616, 198 A.2d 245, an illegal arrest,......