Veney v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
211 A.2d 343, 239 Md. 702, 1965 Md. LEXIS 604
Opinion
Applicant contends that this .Post Conviction proceeding should be determined under the provisions of Ch. 442 of the Acts of 1965. Without deciding that he is entitled as a matter of right to have his application so considered, we shall comply with his request.
For the reasons assigned by Judge Prendergast in his opinion below, the application will be denied.
Application denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Veney v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary, 211 A.2d 343, 239 Md. 702, 1965 Md. LEXIS 604 (Md. 1965).
211 A.2d 343 (Veney v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.