|
quicker would be to consider first if the
Committee of the Whole is willing to con-
sider it without having the printed amend-
ment proposed by Delegate Henderson.
This would, regardless of which way the
vote went on that, give us time to have the
other two amendments in printed form. It
is easy enough for us to comprehend the
effect of Delegate Henderson's amendment.
The Chair would therefore be disposed to
ask whether there is any objection to pro-
ceeding with the consideration of an
amendment to strike all of section 11, which
would be all of lines 41 to 49, inclusive, on
page 3, with the understanding the printed
amendment will be on your desk very
shortly.
For what purpose does Delegate Sherbow
rise?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Before I
would state or not state an objection, may
I ask Delegate Henderson a question on
that?
THE CHAIRMAN: Very well.
DELEGATE HENDERSON: I yield.
THE CHAIRMAN : The only point here,
Delegate Sherbow, is whether we can pro-
ceed without waiting for the printed
amendment.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: My question
goes to the heart, and that is this: Would
not your amendment strike out the whole
grand jury system in Maryland?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Henderson.
DELEGATE HENDERSON: I think not,
because as I understand it there is no pro-
vision in the Maryland Constitution which
even requires a grand jury. It simply says
in one article that it may be on indictment
or charge.
He is entitled to a copy of the indictment
or charge. It is entirely a matter of statu-
tory law and the rules of the court as I
understand it under the present system and
that would not be changed by the failure
to adopt this provision.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow,
the Chair suggests what we are now doing
is debating the question. The only matter
at the moment is whether there is any ob-
jection to proceeding with the debate with-
out having the printed amendment before
you.
The Chair hears none.
This will be Amendment No, 17, pro-
posed by Delegate Henderson.
|
The amendment is on page 3 to strike
all of section 11, Grand Jury Indictment
as a Right of the Accused, comprising lines
41 to 49, inclusive, the Committee Recom-
mendation R&P-2.
Is there a second?
DELEGATE CASE: Seconded.
THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment hav-
ing been seconded, the Chair recognizes
Delegate Henderson to speak to the amend-
ment.
DELEGATE HENDERSON: Mr. Chair-
man, fellow delegates, I am not proposing
any change in the existing law, which I
think works very well, although it is set
up by statute and by rule of court. The
practice is, as I understand it, that most
serious crimes are taken before the grand
jury. But since many people are held in
jail, they are given an option to stand trial
and not wait for the action of the grand
jury on an information filed by the state's
attorney. I do not know what proportion of
crime in Maryland, even the most serious
crimes, are tried under that system, but I
believe it is a very large percentage. It is
a very useful thing, because as I say,
people can get to trial quicker, rather than
stay in jail, and it avoids the great load
and burden which would otherwise be
placed upon the grand jury.
I want to preserve that system. I want
that perfectly clear, with such improve-
ment as may be made from time to time.
But by adopting this language, which is
lifted out of the federal Constitution and
applicable to federal cases not to state
cases, you may lift some of the gloss that
has been put on that, namely that the
accused has a right to indictment which
he cannot waive. Likewise he is not per-
mitted, I believe, to waive jury cases in
the federal courts.
That system, which is based on relatively
a small number of specialized statutory
crimes, such as the Mann Act and others,
and does not cover the whole gamut of
common law crimes which exist at the
state level, has been set up on a very dif-
ferent basis. I fear that by adopting the
federal language we may in fact destroy
our present system which has been set up
under the statutes and rules of the court.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any ques-
tions of the sponsor of the amendment?
(There was no response.)
Does any person desire to speak in
opposition?
|
