J. MILLARD TAWES, Governor                      635

of Baltimore City OR OF THE PEOPLE'S COURT OF ANY
COUNTY) [,] was without jurisdiction to impose the sen-
tence, or that the sentence exceeds the maximum authorized by law,
or that the sentence is otherwise subject to collateral attack upon
any ground of alleged error [heretofore] which would otherwise be
available under a writ of habeas corpus, writ of coram nobis, or other
common law or statutory remedy, may institute a proceeding under
this subtitle to set aside or correct the sentence, provided the alleged
error has not been previously and finally litigated or waived in the
proceedings resulting in the conviction, or in any other proceeding
that the petitioner has taken to secure relief from his conviction.

(b)  For the purposes of this subtitle, an allegation of error shall
be deemed to be finally litigated when the Court of Appeals has
rendered a decision on the merits thereof, EITHER UPON DIRECT
APPEAL OR UPON ANY CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICA-
TION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FILED PURSUANT TO SEC-
TION 645-I OF THIS SUBTITLE; or when a court of original
jurisdiction, after a full and fair hearing, has rendered a decision on
the merits thereof upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus or a,
writ of error coram nobis, UNLESS SAID DECISION UPON THE
MERITS OF SUCH PETITION IS CLEARLY ERRONEOUS.

(c)  For the purposes of this subtitle, an allegation of error shall
be deemed to be waived when a petitioner could have made, but
intelligently and knowingly failed to make, such allegation before
trial, at trial, on direct appeal (whether or not said petitioner actually
took such an appeal), in any habeas corpus or coram nobis proceed-
ing actually instituted by said petitioner, in a prior petition under
this subtitle, or in any other proceeding ACTUALLY INSTITUTED
BY SAID PETITIONER, unless such allegation is one of lack of
jurisdiction or unless the failure to make such allegation shall be
excused because of special circumstances. The burden of proving
the existence of such special circumstances shall be upon the
petitioner.

When an allegation of error could have been made by a petitioner
before trial, at trial, on direct appeal (whether or not said petitioner
actually took such an appeal), in any habeas corpus or coram nobis
proceeding actually instituted by said petitioner, in a prior petition
under this subtitle, or in any other proceeding ACTUALLY INSTI-
TUTED BY SAID PETITIONER, but was not in fact so made,
there shall be a rebuttable presumption that said petitioner intel-
ligently and knowingly failed to make such allegation; unless such
allegation is one of lack of jurisdiction.

(d)  For the purposes of this subtitle and notwithstanding any
other provision hereof, no allegation of error shall be deemed to
have been finally litigated or waived where, subsequent to any
decision upon the merits thereof or subsequent to any proceeding
in which said allegation otherwise may have been waived, any court
whose decisions are binding upon the lower courts of this State
holds that the Constitution of the United States or of Maryland
imposes upon State criminal proceedings a procedural or substantive
standard not theretofore recognized, which such standard not there-
tofore recognized, which such standard is intended to be applied
retrospectively and would thereby affect the validity of the petitioner's
conviction or sentence.