Fleury v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
This text of 160 A.2d 790 (Fleury 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.
Opinion
For the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Sodaro filed in the Criminal Court of Baltimore for denying the application of Raymond C. Fleury under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, and for the further reason stated below, Fleury’s application for leave to appeal is denied. Judge Sodaro found that Fleury’s allegations of the State’s knowing use of perjured testimony were so vague and indefinite as to be insufficient. To this we add that his application admits that the allegedly untrue testimony does not appear in the transcript of the testimony of his trial and that the record of his hearing under the Post Conviction Procedure Act shows no effort or testimony on Fleury’s part to substantiate the allegations of his petition as to this matter.
Application denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
160 A.2d 790, 222 Md. 635, 1960 Md. LEXIS 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleury-v-warden-of-maryland-penitentiary-md-1960.