Mears v. Warden
This text of 155 A.2d 72 (Mears v. Warden) 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
In his application for leave to appeal from the denial and dismissal of his petition for post conviction relief, the applicant assigned two reasons for allowing his appeal. He contends (i) that the evidence on which he was convicted of a violation of the narcotics law was obtained by means of an illegal search and seizure in violation of his constitutional rights and (ii) that—other than the alleged prohibited evi[683]*683dence—there was no evidence legally sufficient to sustain a conviction.
The contention concerning the legality and constitutionality of the search and seizure although available on appeal if preserved below cannot be raised under post conviction procedure. Banks v. Warden, 220 Md. 652, 151 A. 2d 897 (1959). The second contention, which is without merit in any event, was not raised below.
Application denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
155 A.2d 72, 220 Md. 682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mears-v-warden-md-1959.