Matthews v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

162 A.2d 452, 223 Md. 649, 1960 Md. LEXIS 554
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedJuly 5, 1960
Docket[P.C. No. 113, September Term, 1959.]
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 162 A.2d 452 (Matthews v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction) 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
Matthews v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction, 162 A.2d 452, 223 Md. 649, 1960 Md. LEXIS 554 (Md. 1960).

Opinion

Prescott, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The applicant was indicted for the slaying of his brother during a drinking soiree in the applicant’s two-room trailer in Olney. On June 10, 1958, the applicant was tried and convicted of second degree murder by a jury in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County. He was sentenced to a term of fifteen (15) years by Judge Reeves, this sentence subsequently being reduced to ten (10) years.

The petitioner was represented by competent counsel at his trial and at the hearing below, where Judge Pugh denied the petition for relief under the Post Conviction Procedure Act. The petition makes three contentions:

1. That the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury.

This contention goes to the regularity of the proceedings at trial, and may be reviewed on direct appeal if properly reserved, *651 but is not available in post conviction procedure. Cf. Heffner v. Warden, 211 Md. 638, cert. den. 353 U. S. 914.

2. The sentence was imposed in violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

A bald allegation of a denial of constitutional rights will not be considered under the Act. Daniels v. Warden, 222 Md. 606; Galloway v. Warden, 221 Md. 611. The original sentence of fifteen years, as well as the reduced sentence of ten years, was within the statutory limits for second degree murder. Code (1957), Art. 27, Sec. 414. Since the statutory limit has not been exceeded, the petitioner cannot be heard to complain. Plump & Kye v. Warden, 220 Md. 662; Ellis v. Warden, 220 Md. 676.

3. As a last contention, the petitioner asserts that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction of second degree murder.

Such a contention has been held by this Court, on many occasions, to be not a proper subject for review under the Post Conviction Procedure Act. Washington v. Warden, 222 Md. 624; Burgess v. Warden, 221 Md. 609.

Application denied.

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

Related

Cirincione v. State
705 A.2d 96 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1998)
Vernon v. Warden
274 A.2d 405 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1971)
Hess v. State
243 A.2d 651 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1968)
Salisbury v. Grimes
158 S.E.2d 412 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1967)
Ross v. Warden
227 A.2d 42 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1967)
Stewart v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
221 A.2d 709 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)
Farrow v. Warden of the Maryland Penitentiary
217 A.2d 270 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)
Ellis v. Warden of the Maryland Penitentiary
215 A.2d 836 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)
Slater v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
195 A.2d 675 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1963)
Faulkner v. Director of Patuxent Institution
187 A.2d 473 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
162 A.2d 452, 223 Md. 649, 1960 Md. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-warden-of-maryland-house-of-correction-md-1960.