Hyde v. State

Oppeni-ieimer, J.,

filed the following opinion, dissenting in part, in which McWieeiams, J., concurred.

I agree with the majority that Escobedo should not operate retroactively on convictions that became final before it was announced and that it is unwise and undesirable that it should. But, in my opinion, Escobedo did not effect a change in the Maryland law applicable to this case. Under that law, on the *674facts as- we now have .them, I bélieve that Hyde’s confessions were not freely and voluntarily made and were, therefore, inadmissible.

■ On the remand of Hyde’s petition for post conviction…