Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

RICKY DINGLE v. STATE OF MARYLAND

This case involves the review of a sentencing judge’s imposition of a 25-year, no possibility of parole, sentence for an armed robbery that was committed on October 2, 1997. After Dingle was sentenced in 2002, he filed a direct appeal in which he did not take issue with the imposition of the 25-year (no possibility of parole) sentence for armed robbery.

On April 13, 2013, Dingle filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence, in which he relied upon Md. Rule 4-345(a). Dingle argued that the trial court, in 2002, was without authority to impose an enhanced sentence of 25 years without the possibility of parole because, purportedly, the State had not adequately and properly proven the requisite two predicate convictions beyond a reasonable doubt.

The State, relying upon Bryant v. State. 436 Md. 653 (2014), contends that the issue presented by Dingle has not been preserved for appellate review because Dingle could have, but did not, challenge the sentence on direct review.

Read the unreported opinion.