Rice v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

221 Md. 604
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedDecember 21, 1959
DocketP. C. No. 48
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 221 Md. 604 (Rice 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.

Bluebook
Rice v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary, 221 Md. 604 (Md. 1959).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The Post Conviction Procedure Act is a procedural act and not an enlargement of substantive rights of review. State v. D’Onofrio, 221 Md. 20, 155 A. 2d 643. The question of the legality of search and seizure cannot be raised under the Act. Banks v. Warden, 220 Md. 652, 151 A. 2d 897; Mears v. Warden, 220 Md. 682, 155 A. 2d 72. After conviction a question of bail may not be raised on habeas corpus, Brooks v. Warden, 218 Md. 650, 145 A. 2d 569; nor may alleged irregularities in preliminary proceedings or procedures which may not be raised on habeas corpus be reviewed under the Post Conviction Procedure Act. For the above reasons, and for the reasons stated in the opinion and order of Judge Manley filed in this case in the Criminal Court of Baltimore on July 16, 1959, the application of Philip Raymond Rice for leave to appeal is denied.

Application for leave to appeal denied.

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

Related

Mason v. State
522 A.2d 1344 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1987)
State v. Lanoue
366 A.2d 1158 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1976)
Rice v. Warden
156 A.2d 632 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
221 Md. 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rice-v-warden-of-maryland-penitentiary-md-1959.