Carroll v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

222 Md. 618
Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided April 18, 1960·No. P. C. No. 93·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petitioner’s contentions deal mainly with the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to convict, which is not a ground for post conviction relief. Banks v. Warden, 221 Md. 592, 155 A. 2d 697. Although he complains that he was not given a transcript of the testimony of his original trial, there is no allegation that he either requested such a transcript or that he sought an appeal and was prevented from perfecting it as a result of being denied the transcript, or otherwise. His application to the lower court shows no grounds for relief under [619] the Post Conviction Procedure Act, and his application for leave to appeal is denied.

Application denied.

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

Carroll v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary, 222 Md. 618 (Md. 1960).

222 Md. 618 (Carroll v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carroll v. Warden
159 A.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1993)
Carroll v. Warden
231 A.2d 723 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1967)
Smith v. Warden
169 A.2d 444 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1961)
Ellinger v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
167 A.2d 334 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1961)
Scott v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
164 A.2d 270 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1960)