Belardo v. Warden

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Belardo v. Warden

59 A.2d 743, 191 Md. 755, 1948 Md. LEXIS 423

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedJune 17, 1948

Docket[H.C. No. 7, October Term, 1948.]

StatusPublished

This text of 59 A.2d 743 (Belardo v. Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Belardo v. Warden, 59 A.2d 743, 191 Md. 755, 1948 Md. LEXIS 423 (Md. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an application for an appeal from an order of Judge James Clark of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, dismissing the petition of the applicant for a writ of habeas corpus. The ground on which the writ was asked was that the commitment from the Criminal Court of Baltimore *Page 756 City did not contain the statement that applicant had waived his right to a jury trial. That is not necessary in a court of record. In his brief applicant does not mention this question, but seems to contend that he was first found guilty by one judge and then about a month later was found guilty by another. That might easily be, due to the nature of the crime with which he was charged, that is, desertion. He was placed on probation, and, when he did not comply with the court's order, was sentenced to eighteen months in the Maryland House of Correction.

There is nothing in his application or brief on which he can be given any relief.

Appeal dismissed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This is an application for an appeal from an order of Judge James Clark of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, dismissing the petition of the applicant for a writ of habeas corpus. The ground on which the writ was asked was that the commitment from the Criminal Court of Baltimore *Page 756 City did not contain the statement that applicant had waived his right to a jury trial. That is not necessary in a court of record. In his brief applicant does not mention this question, but seems to contend that he was first found guilty by one judge and then about a month later was found guilty by another. That might easily be, due to the nature of the crime with which he was charged, that is, desertion. He was placed on probation, and, when he did not comply with the court's order, was sentenced to eighteen months in the Maryland House of Correction.

There is nothing in his application or brief on which he can be given any relief.

Appeal dismissed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.2d 743, 191 Md. 755, 1948 Md. LEXIS 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belardo-v-warden-md-1948.