Brewster v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

243 Md. 688
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedJuly 5, 1966
DocketApp. No. 139
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 243 Md. 688 (Brewster v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary) 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
Brewster v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary, 243 Md. 688 (Md. 1966).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Application denied for the reasons stated by Judge Harold E. Naughton in his opinion in the lower court.

The applicant, Randolph Brewster, claimed in one of his contentions that his confession was illegally elicited and could not be used against him at his trial, because he was “denied the assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.” The applicant was convicted on October 17, 1949, fourteen years before the decision in Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U. S. 478, 84 S. Ct. 1758, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977 (1963). We have held that the exclusionary rule in Escobedo should not be applied retroactively. Hyde v. State, 240 Md. 661, 215 A. 2d 145 (1965). We are happy to note that very recently the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion as we did in Hyde and denied Escobedo retroactive effect. Johnson v. State, 34 U.S.L. Week 4592 (U. S. June 20, 1966).

Application denied.

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

Related

Brewster v. Warden
221 A.2d 83 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
243 Md. 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brewster-v-warden-of-maryland-penitentiary-md-1966.