Waker v. State
63 A.3d 575
Md.2013Background
- The 2009 Act Ch. 655 amended theft penalties: $1,000–$9,999 theft is a felony up to 10 years; < $1,000 is a misdemeanor up to 18 months.
- Prior to 2009, the threshold between misdemeanor and felony was $500.
- Waker committed theft of $615.60 on March 30, 2009; trial and sentencing occurred December 2009.
- At offense time, the theft statute allowed up to 15 years; by sentencing, the statute permitted up to 18 months for <$1,000.
- Waker appealed claiming his sentence was illegal under the 2009 amendments; the case questioned which law applied to his sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether illegal-sentence review can occur despite trial-court waiver | Waker contends Rule 4-345(a) allows review of an illegal sentence even without trial-tWaker | State argues waiver applies; review limited | Not waived; illegal-sentence review permitted |
| What law governs sentence when penalty is reduced after offense but before trial | Waker argues CH. 655 should apply; trial court exceeded statutory limits | State relies on general saving clause applying prior law | Trial-law at time of trial determines legality; Waker’s sentence illegal under 2009 amendments |
| Applicability of the General Saving Clause to criminal penalties here | General saving clause preserves penalties under prior law | Saving clause requires applying older penalties | Saving clause does not require applying pre-655 penalties; applies to interpretation; not here |
| Whether the sentence was illegal under the statute in effect at trial/sentencing | Under 2009 amendments, ≤$1,000 theft is misdemeanor; Waker argues the sentence should reflect that | State disagrees on applicable penalties | Sentence was illegal; must be remanded for new sentencing under 2009 law |
Key Cases Cited
- Walczak v. State, 302 Md. 422 (1985) (illegal sentence review not waived under Rule 4-345(a))
- Johnson v. State, 427 Md. 356 (2012) (waiver exceptions for illegal sentences; saving clause discussion)
- Miles v. State, 349 Md. 215 (1998) (administrative of saving clause and law-applied principles)
- State v. Kennerly, 204 Md. 412 (1954) (saving clause as interpretive aid; general rule against repeal by implication)
- State v. American Bonding Co., 128 Md. 268 (1916) (saving clause limitations; application to repeals/amendments)
- Bell v. Maryland, 236 Md. 356 (1964) (context of statute changes favorable to defendant on appeal)