Content area
Full Text
Statements made to police by a Randallstown man as part of a plea agreement in a burglary investigation should not have been admitted at his trial after the deal soured, the Court of Special Appeals has held.
Once the state rescinded the agreement it made with Charles Lee Pitt, the incriminating remarks he made in reliance on the deal could no longer be considered voluntary, the intermediate appeals court said. It reversed Pitt's May 2002 conviction by the Harford County Circuit Court, which had imposed a 20-year jail term for first-degree burglary, a concurrent 60-day term for malicious destruction of property, and an order to pay $400,000 in restitution to the victims.
"By rescinding the plea bargain, the State gave up all rights to use [Pitt's] statements at trial," Judge Arrie W. Davis wrote for the split court in a 60-page opinion that includes one concurrence and one dissent.
Even without Pitt's statements, the court specifically declined to find the evidence was insufficient to convict, allowing a retrial on the charges.
Pitt's attorney declined to comment yesterday. Kathryn Grill Graeff, chief of criminal appeals in the attorney general's office, said the opinion "reflects differing views regarding when a statement made by a defendant in the course of a plea bargain may be used against the defendant."
The Harford County State's Attorney's Office had agreed to not to prosecute Pitt on charges stemming...