Woodland v. Warden

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Woodland v. Warden

214 A.2d 160, 240 Md. 715

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

DecidedNovember 10, 1965

DocketApp. No. 42

StatusPublished

This text of 214 A.2d 160 (Woodland 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.

Bluebook

Woodland v. Warden, 214 A.2d 160, 240 Md. 715 (Md. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This application for leave to appeal from a denial of post conviction relief contains no statement of reasons, as required by Maryland Rule BK46 b, and must be dismissed on that ground. Buettner v. Superintendent, 239 Md. 710, 212 A. 2d 464 (1965) ; Dofflemyer v. Director, 237 Md. 639, 206 A. 2d 703 (1965).

Furthermore, even if Rule BK46 b had been complied with, the application would be dismissed for the reasons stated by Judge Macgill in his memorandum and order of May 28, 1965.

Application denied.

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

Per Curiam.

This application for leave to appeal from a denial of post conviction relief contains no statement of reasons, as required by Maryland Rule BK46 b, and must be dismissed on that ground. Buettner v. Superintendent, 239 Md. 710, 212 A. 2d 464 (1965) ; Dofflemyer v. Director, 237 Md. 639, 206 A. 2d 703 (1965).

Furthermore, even if Rule BK46 b had been complied with, the application would be dismissed for the reasons stated by Judge Macgill in his memorandum and order of May 28, 1965.

Application denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.2d 160, 240 Md. 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodland-v-warden-md-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack