Where a recognizance has been forfeited, the Governor may remit the whole or any part thereof provided the judge of the court in which the forfeiture took place shall so recommend.14 In case the recognizance was taken by a justice of the peace, the Governor may act on recommendations other than those of the justice of the peace.1 15 The Governor may not remit any fine or forfeiture belonging to an informer, but he may remit any fine or forfeiture, or any part thereof, not belonging to an informer.16 The Governor may remit the whole or any part of any fine imposed by any court martial.1 Effect of pardon.—No judicial decisions appear on the effect of a pardon. Presumably a pardon is an act of grace, limited in its effect to the wording of the instrument. The constitution expressly provides that a pardon restores the right to vote to any person who has lost this privilege by virtue of having been convicted of larceny or other infamous crime after reaching the age of 21.18 The Governor's nolle prosequi is effective, if it expressly so provides, to save the person from all further prosecution for or on account of the same offense.10 Ordinarily, a nolle does not operate as a pardon and the accused remains subject to be proceeded against by another indictment for the same offense.20 GOOD-TIME DEDUCTIONS History. The amount of deduction for good conduct in the present law has been the same since the law was first passed in 1916.1 Until 1922, however, the administration of the law was under the control of the board of prison control. From that year the administration of the law has been in 14 Md. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 41, § 20. 15 Ibid. 10 Id. § 21. 17 Id. § 23. 18 Md. Const. art. I, § 2. "Infamous crime" is construed to be one deemed such at common law. Garitee v. Bond, 102 Md. 379, 62 Atl. 631 (1905). If the person was under 21 at the time of conviction for an infamous crime, a pardon is not necessary to give him voting privileges. 15 Opinions Att'y Gen. 109 (1930); 20 id. 618 (1935). 2016 Corpus Juris p. 432, § 778 et seq. 2016 Corpus Juris p. 432, § 778 et seq. 1 Md. Laws 1916, ch. 556, § 637. the hands of the State board of welfare. Furthermore, since 1916, the board of prison control, and after 1922 the board of welfare, have been empowered to grant additional good-behavior allowance for convicts employed on the public roads." The good-time law was amended in May 1937 to authorize the board of welfare to allow an additional deduction of 5 days a month, beginning with the sixth month of sentence, for "exceptional industry, application and skill in the performance of industrial, agricultural, or administrative tasks assigned."4 By whom administered.—Administration of the good-time law is by the warden acting with the approval of the board of welfare. Upon the admission of an inmate to the Maryland house of correction, he is immediately credited with 5 days per month "good conduct time." This is carried through his entire sentence until and unless such credit is forfeited for violation of rules. Credits for industrial good time are recommended to the board of welfare by the warden. Persons eligible.-Each prisoner who is not guilty of a violation of the discipline or rules of the prison and who labors with diligence and fidelity is entitled to regular "good conduct time." Prisoners who have served 6 months of a sentence and who are deemed to have manifested exceptional industry, application, and skill in the performance of industrial, agricultural, or administrative tasks assigned to them, may, in the discretion of the board of welfare, be allowed additional deductions.R Amount of deduction.-The amount of deduction for each calendar month commencing on the first day of the month next after the prisoner's arrival at the institution is 5 Md. Laws 1922, ch. 29, p. 59. Md. Laws 1937, ch. 215, § 1. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27, § 683, as amended Md. Laws 1937, ch. 215, § 1. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27, § 683, as amended Md. Laws 1937, ch. 215, § 1. Convicts employed on public work may be entitled to additional allowances for their good deportment and cheerful compliance with the rules of the board. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art 27, § 718. The good-time laws apply to the Maryland penitentiary, the house of correction at Jessups and the state penal farm at Roxbury, Md. Prisoners days. The board of welfare is empowered to grant additional good-behavior allowance to convicts on public road work." By a recent law, the board of welfare is authorized to allow 5 days a month additional industrial good time.10 Forfeiture.-For each and every violation of the rules and discipline of the institution, or want of fidelity or care in the performance of work, a prisoner is required to forfeit all gained time in the month in which the delinquency occurs. According to the aggravated nature or frequency of a prisoner's offense, the board of welfare is authorized to deduct a portion of all time gained for good conduct. However, the deduction allowed for industrial good time may not be forfeited.11 Restoration.-Forfeited time may be restored by the warden of the penitentiary with approval of the board. At the house of correction the action of the warden in restoring good time must have the approval of the board of welfare if the restoration is of more than 5 days. Restoration at the penal farm is made by the superintendent upon the board's recommendation. EXPIRATION OF SENTENCE Formalities of release.-The warden or superintendent must furnish to the police in the city or county where the institution is located, on or before the twenty-eighth of each month, the name of each convict whose sentence expires the following month, together with the date when the sentence began, the county or city from which committed, the crime working on the road or State farm are entitled to the deduction. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27 §§ 671, 725. Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27, § 683. • Id. § 718. 10 Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27, § 683, as amended Md. Laws 1937, ch. 215, § 1. 11 Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) § 683, as amended Md. Laws 1937, Ch. 215, 1. At the Maryland State penitentiary good time may not be taken away without the approval of the board of welfare. Letter from warden, State Penitentiary, Aug. 10, 1937. At the Maryland house of correction, however, 5 days for the current month may be taken away by the warden himself. In order to take away more than 5 days, the warden is required to submit his recommendation to the board of welfare. Letter from warden, Aug. 7, 1937. At the State penal farm, the superintendent may also forfeit as much as 5 days, but any greater forfeiture must be approved by the board. for which committed, and the exact date when the prisoner will be discharged. The warden of the penitentiary also notifies the Federal Bureau of Investigation upon the release of a prisoner. Prisoners released from the penitentiary or from the house of correction receive no papers upon discharge. Discharge gratuities.-Prisoners in the penitentiary receive upon discharge the sum of $2 and clothing which may be required as a minimum by the season in which the release is made. Prisoners released from the house of correction receive no cash except 30 cents carfare to Baltimore when they have no funds. Prisoners' aid.-The Prisoners' Aid Association assists prisoners with clothing upon discharge, if necessary. They may also supply a man released from the penitentiary with train fare. MASSACHUSETTS SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE Suspension of sentence at common law.-There are no Massachusetts cases on the question whether, in the absence of statute, the courts have power after a plea or verdict of guilty to suspend the imposition or the execution of sentence. But the practice of "filing" can be termed a form of indefinite suspension of the imposition of sentence. Filing.-Massachusetts has a peculiar common law practice of placing an indictment on file. After a verdict of guilty, the case, with the consent of the parties and on such terms as the court may impose, may be "filed." The effect of such filing is merely to suspend active proceedings in the case and to dispense with the necessity of entering formal continuances on the docket. This practice has been upheld 1 Md. Ann. Code (Bagby, 1924) art. 27, § 691. It is the duty of Maryland courts in sentencing convicts to the penitentiary to sentence them for such a period as will expire between the first day of April and the last day of August "If they shall deem it expedient to do so." Id. § 571. 1 "The courts of Massachusetts in the first half of the seventeenth century suspended both the imposition and the execution of sentence in a number of instances, occasionally in connection with probation." Warner, Some Legal Problems Raised by Probation in Glueck, Probation and Criminal Justice (1933) 25. See also Grinnell, Probation as an Orthodox Common Law Practice in Massachusetts Prior to the Statutory System (1917) 2 Mass. L. Q. 591. by the courts 2 and recognized by statute. "Filing" is not the same as a dismissal of the case, because a prosecution which has been filed can be taken from the file at any time, whereupon the defendant can be required to serve his sentence. But while a "filed" case can be taken from the file this almost never happens. For most practical purposes a case which has been filed results in the release of the defendant. On the surface it seems to be merely another name for a suspended sentence. Guilt is established and then proceedings are suspended during the good behavior of the defendant. But in actual operation it seems to differ from the suspended sentence. The suspended sentence is granted by the judge. It may be on motion of the defendant, on motion of the prosecuting attorney, or on the judge's own initiative without such a motion. But in any event it is, in fact as well as in form, the act of the judge. In Massachusetts the actual "filing" is by order of the judge, on motion of the prosecuting attorney, but the will of the prosecuting attorney generally determines the result. The difference seems to be this: A judge does not suspend a sentence unless he is satisfied that such a step is proper under all the circumstances; a prosecuting attorney's motion that a prosecution be "filed" in Massachusetts is granted unless the judge has definite doubts concerning the propriety of that disposition of the particular case. This is a very wide difference in actual practice. Moreover, there is a further practical difference between a "filed case" and a suspended sentence. Although in theory the "filed case" may be taken from the file as readily as an order suspending sentence may be revoked, in practice the former is extremely rare whereas the latter is relatively common. Statutes.-The statutory provisions regarding suspension of sentence are limited to a few references in the probation laws. Thus, the courts are empowered to suspend execution 2 Comm. v. Dowdican, 115 Mass. 133 (1874); Marks v. Wentworth, 199 Mass. 44, 85 N. E. 81 (1908); Comm. v. Carver, 224 Mass. 42, 112 N. E. 481 (1916). 'Mass. Gen. Laws (1932) ch. 277, § 70 B (providing that motions to file must be accompanied by written statement of reasons, signed by the prosecuting attorney and accompanied by any previous criminal record of the defendant). See post Probation: Probation to Allow Payment of Fine. |