Opinion
1400-20
11-05-2021
JASON TERANCE RICHARDS v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Circuit Court for Baltimore County Case No.: 03-K-05-000643
Fader, C.J., Zic, Raker, Irma S. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.
OPINION [*]
PER CURIAM 1
Following a 2005 trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, a jury found Jason Terance Richards, appellant, guilty of first-degree murder, two counts of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, and second-degree rape. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment for first-degree murder, and to twenty consecutive years' imprisonment for second-degree rape; the remaining counts were merged for sentencing.
This sentence reflects the changes that were made after this Court remanded the case to the circuit court upon direct appeal.
In the ensuing years, Richards has mounted various unsuccessful attacks on his convictions. In August of 2020, acting pro se, he filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis which the circuit court denied without holding a hearing. Appellant noted an appeal from that denial. In this appeal, appellant claims that the circuit court erred in denying his petition.
To be eligible for coram nobis relief, a petitioner must satisfy various criteria. One of those criterion is that the petitioner is not incarcerated or on parole or probation. Graves v. State, 215 Md.App. 339, 348 (2013). As noted above, in 2005, the court sentenced appellant to life plus twenty consecutive years' imprisonment. He is still incarcerated, and he will be incarcerated or on parole for the remainder of his life. Thus, he is not now eligible for coram nobis relief. The circuit court, therefore, did not err or abuse its discretion in denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. 2 Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court.
JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE COUNTY AFFIRMED. COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLANT. 3
[*] This is an unreported opinion, and it may not be cited in any paper, brief, motion, or other document filed in this Court or any other Maryland Court as either precedent within the rule of stare decisis or as persuasive authority. Md. Rule 1-104.