## Facts

- Sandra Barnes was charged with shoplifting under Maryland law based on an incident at a Baltimore supermarket.
- Barnes demanded a jury trial; the case was transferred from the District Court to the Criminal Court of Baltimore.
- At trial, Barnes was rearraigned and, through counsel, entered a plea of not guilty.
- The parties agreed to proceed on a “statement of facts” rather than live testimony.
- The prosecutor recited that a store special officer would testify he saw Barnes place a two-pound box of sugar in her purse and zip the bag, and that he did not observe her pay for it.
- No witnesses testified; the special officer was not present; Barnes did not testify.
- Defense counsel offered a limited modification that Barnes was fourth in line and had her hands full of other groceries when approached.
- The trial judge found Barnes guilty based solely on the prosecutor’s recitation and imposed sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether a conviction under a not-guilty plea may rest solely on the prosecutor’s factual proffer when the defendant does not personally admit the facts or clearly waive the rights to confrontation and cross-examination.
2. Whether the procedure used effectively operated as a guilty plea without the required on-the-record advisements and knowing, voluntary waivers.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the conviction and remanded for further proceedings.
- The record did not show that Barnes personally admitted the truth of the proffered facts or knowingly and voluntarily relinquished trial rights.
- Treating an unsworn prosecutorial narrative as the evidentiary basis for guilt, without a clear stipulation and waiver, was improper under a not-guilty plea.
- The procedure, as conducted, functioned too much like a guilty plea without the safeguards required for accepting a guilty or nolo contendere plea.

## Legal Principles

- A not-guilty agreed statement of facts is not, by itself, the legal equivalent of a guilty plea; it is a mechanism to submit an agreed evidentiary record for adjudication.
- When proceeding without live witnesses effectively relinquishes confrontation and cross-examination, the court must ensure a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver.
- The record must reflect the defendant’s personal understanding of the agreed-facts procedure and the rights surrendered; counsel’s assertions alone are insufficient.
- A conviction may not rest solely on a prosecutor’s proffer absent a clear, defendant-approved stipulation that the proffered facts constitute the evidentiary record on which guilt will be decided.

## Conclusion

Because the trial record did not establish that Barnes personally and knowingly agreed to have guilt determined solely from the prosecutor’s factual recitation, or that she validly waived core trial rights, the conviction for shoplifting was reversed and the case was remanded.


Barnes v. State, 354 A.2d 499 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1976)