TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Williams v. State

Patrick L. Williams v. State of Maryland

Williams v. State, 414 A.2d 254 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1980)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 12, 1980
Docket
Nos. 1184, September Term, 1979
Judges
Moore, Morton, Wilner
Citations
414 A.2d 25445 Md. App. 5961980 Md. App. LEXIS 290

Opinion — Wilner

*597 Wilner, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

In May, 1975, appellant was charged with four counts of burglary. He pled guilty to four counts of breaking and entering, a lesser included offense, and was convicted thereon. On September 5, 1975, he was sentenced by the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County to five years imprisonment; however, four years of that sentence were suspended in lieu of active probation.

Appellant served that one year in prison and commenced his four-year probation period on September 5, 1976. On October 5, 1979, appellant was found in violation of the conditions of his probation for reasons that are not in dispute here. The court revoked the probation and committed him to prison for five years.

This, the court had no authority to do. Md. Ann. Code art. 27, § 642 authorizes a court, in revoking probation, to sentence the person to serve "the period of imprisonment prescribed in the original sentence or any portion thereof.” The statute does not permit the court to increase the original sentence, however; and, in that regard, the phrase "period of imprisonment prescribed in the original sentence” must be taken to mean the unexpired term thereof.

See Costello v. State, 240 Md. 164 (1965). A person may not be compelled to serve a sentence, or part of a sentence, that he has already served, for that necessarily involves an increase in the original sentence.

In this case, the maximum period of imprisonment allowable under § 642 would have been four years.

Sentence vacated; case remanded to Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County for resentencing; costs shall not be reallocated pursuant to Maryland Rule 1082 f.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1985: 21987: 11999: 12009: 119852026peak 1985 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Williams v. State528 A.2d 507 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1987)
  2. Christian v. State489 A.2d 64 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1985)
  3. Smitley v. State487 A.2d 315 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1985)
  4. State v. Asuncion205 P.3d 577 (Haw. App. 2009)
  5. State v. Rioux, P2/90-0669a (1999)Nos. P2/90-0669A, P2/90-0670A (Sup. Ct. R.I. May 3, 1999)

Most recent

  1. State v. Asuncion205 P.3d 577 (Haw. App. 2009)
  2. State v. Rioux, P2/90-0669a (1999)Nos. P2/90-0669A, P2/90-0670A (Sup. Ct. R.I. May 3, 1999)
  3. Williams v. State528 A.2d 507 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1987)
  4. Christian v. State489 A.2d 64 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1985)
  5. Smitley v. State487 A.2d 315 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1985)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Costello v. State, 213 A.2d 739 (Md. 1965) 17

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list