Doxzen v. Director

205 A.2d 238, 236 Md. 657, 1964 Md. LEXIS 969
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedDecember 7, 1964
Docket[App. No. 69, September Term, 1964.]
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 205 A.2d 238 (Doxzen v. Director) 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
Doxzen v. Director, 205 A.2d 238, 236 Md. 657, 1964 Md. LEXIS 969 (Md. 1964).

Opinion

236 Md. 657 (1964)
205 A.2d 238

DOXZEN
v.
DIRECTOR OF PATUXENT INSTITUTION

[App. No. 69, September Term, 1964.]

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Decided December 7, 1964.

Before HENDERSON, C.J., and HAMMOND, PRESCOTT, HORNEY, MARBURY, SYBERT and OPPENHEIMER, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

In this application for leave to appeal from a denial of post conviction relief, the applicant, an inmate of Patuxent Institution, seeks to attack the jurisdictional basis of his commitment thereto, on the ground that his criminal sentence had expired at the time of the determination that he was a defective delinquent, as he may under Simon v. Director, 235 Md. 626. But there is no merit in the point. Eggleston v. State, 209 Md. 504, 511; Roberts v. Director, 226 Md. 643, 651; Bullock v. Director, 231 Md. 629, 631. Cf. Code (1964 Supp.), Art. 31 B, sec. 6(e), as amended by Ch. 283, Acts of 1963.

Application denied.

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

Related

Bougknight v. Director of Patuxent Institution
210 A.2d 374 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1965)
Laird v. Director of Patuxent Institution
205 A.2d 238 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
205 A.2d 238, 236 Md. 657, 1964 Md. LEXIS 969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doxzen-v-director-md-1964.