Lishure v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
This text of 156 A.2d 435 (Lishure 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
Application for leave to appeal under the Post Conviction Procedure Act is denied for the reasons stated in the opinion of the court below. The only point that needs any amplification is the applicant’s contention that counsel was not appointed to represent him in the trial, when he was convicted of statutory burglary and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. The court below found, and we agree, that there was no showing that an element of unfairness entered into the trial, by reason of failure to appoint counsel, that would amount to a violation of constitutional rights. See Tillett v. Warden, 220 Md. 677. Cf. Brown v. Warden, 218 Md. 643, and Hill v. State, 218 Md. 120. See also Betts v. Brady, 316 U. S. 455, and Edwardsen v. State, 220 Md. 82.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
156 A.2d 435, 221 Md. 600, 1959 Md. LEXIS 456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lishure-v-warden-of-maryland-penitentiary-md-1959.