Faulkner v. Director of Patuxent Institution

217 A.2d 342, 241 Md. 727, 1966 Md. LEXIS 765
Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided March 9, 1966·No. App. No. 30·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This petition for leave to appeal from the trial court’s denial of petitioner’s second application for post conviction relief raises no contentions which could not reasonably have been raised in his first application, which we considered in Faulkner v. Director, 230 Md. 632, 187 A. 2d 473 (1963). It was entirely proper for the trial judge to dismiss petitioner’s application, in accordance with the provisions of Code, Art. 27, § 645 H (1957 Cum. Supp. 1964), which were in effect at the time of the hearing. (The provisions of § 645 H have since been incorporated in § 645 A (c) (1957 Cum. Supp. 1965)). The trial court properly dismissed the petition without a hearing or the appointment of counsel. Maryland Rule BK 48.

Application denied.

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

Faulkner v. Director of Patuxent Institution, 217 A.2d 342, 241 Md. 727, 1966 Md. LEXIS 765 (Md. 1966).

217 A.2d 342 (Faulkner v. Director of Patuxent Institution) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cornell v. State of Maryland
396 F. Supp. 1092 (D. Maryland, 1975)