Opinion
No. 169, September Term, 1967.
Decided July 26, 1968.
POST CONVICTION PROCEDURE — Adequacy Of Counsel — Applicant Shown To Have Been Afforded Adequate And Effective Representation. Applying the rule that counsel is inadequate when, under all the circumstances, an accused has not been afforded a genuine and effective representation, the Court of Special Appeals held that the record showed applicant to have been afforded "adequate and effective representation." p. 635
Decided July 26, 1968.
Application for leave to appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore (GRADY, J.).
Napoleon Martin instituted a proceeding under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, and from a denial of relief, he applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied.
Before MURPHY, C.J., and ANDERSON, MORTON, ORTH, and THOMPSON, JJ.
The application of Napoleon Martin for leave to appeal from an order of Judge J. Harold Grady, presiding in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, denying relief prayed in a petition under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act is denied for the reasons set forth by Judge Grady in the memorandum accompanying the order.
We note, however, that the test of the inadequacy of counsel is no longer whether the representation was so deficient as to make a farce out of the trial. The rule followed by this Court is that counsel is incompetent when under all the circumstances of the particular case the accused has not been afforded a genuine and effective representation. Green v. Warden, 3 Md. App. 266. Judge Grady found that the petitioner was afforded "adequate and effective representation" and on the record before us, applying the more comprehensive rule, we agree.
Application denied.