Whitley v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

135 A.2d 889, 214 Md. 647, 1957 Md. LEXIS 501
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedNovember 20, 1957
Docket[H.C. No. 34, September Term, 1957.]
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 135 A.2d 889 (Whitley 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
Whitley v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction, 135 A.2d 889, 214 Md. 647, 1957 Md. LEXIS 501 (Md. 1957).

Opinion

Hammond, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Joseph Olief Whitley seeks leave to appeal from a denial of a writ of habeas corpus by Judge Raine of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, by which writ he sought to ob *649 tain release from a sentence of twelve years in the House of Correction for murder in the second degree.

Applicant alleges that his counsel was generally incompetent and specifically so in not putting him on the stand to testify in his own behalf, and in failing to introduce evidence which would have changed the complexion of the State’s case. He does not, however, allege bad faith, fraud, or collusion by his attorney with any State official, nor does he allege that he complained to the court concerning his court-appointed counsel or requested the right to take the stand. Habeas corpus is inappropriate under the circumstances and cannot be made to serve the purpose of an appeal or a new trial on the question of innocence or guilt. Sykes v. Warden, 201 Md. 662, 663; Barker v. Warden, 208 Md. 662, 667; Buffington v. Warden, 201 Md. 642.

Applicant further alleges that one of the State’s witnesses committed perjury. We have held repeatedly that in the absence of facts establishing the knowing participation by State officials in the use of perjured testimony, the mere allegation that it was used is insufficient to justify the issuance of the writ. Ramberg v. Warden, 209 Md. 631, 633.

The final allegation is that unfavorable publicity caused prejudice against him. Although this could have been raised on appeal, it cannot serve as a ground for habeas corpus. Randall v. Warden, 208 Md. 667, 671.

Application denied, with costs.

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

Related

Whitley v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction
158 A.2d 905 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1978)
Joseph Henry Clark v. Warden Maryland Penitentiary
293 F.2d 479 (Fourth Circuit, 1961)
Myers v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary
145 A.2d 228 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
135 A.2d 889, 214 Md. 647, 1957 Md. LEXIS 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitley-v-warden-of-maryland-house-of-correction-md-1957.