From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bowen v. Warden

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jul 15, 1952
90 A.2d 174 (Md. 1952)

Opinion

[H.C. No. 7, October Term, 1952 (Adv.).]

Decided July 15, 1952.

HABEAS CORPUS — Illegal Search and Seizure — Failure of Counsel To Appeal — Refusal of Postponement. Contentions of a petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus that he was convicted on evidence obtained by an illegal search and seizure, that his lawyer failed to appeal, although requested to do so, and that he was refused a postponement on account of absence of his attorney, cannot be made on habeas corpus. p. 662 Decided July 15, 1952.

Habeas corpus proceeding by Albert E. Bowen against Warden of Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.

Application denied.

Before MARBURY, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.


This is an application for leave to appeal from denial of a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner in 1950 was convicted in Anne Arundel County of breaking and entering and sentenced to five years in the House of Correction, sentence was suspended for five years during good behavior and petitioner was "paroled". In 1951 petitioner was convicted of larceny in Baltimore County but not sentenced, and was in Anne Arundel County re-sentenced to five years in the House of Correction on violation of probation. Petitioner alleges that he was not guilty in Baltimore County, that he was found guilty only on evidence obtained at his house by illegal search and seizure, that his lawyer, told to appeal in the Baltimore County case, failed to do so, that the Anne Arundel County court refused him a postponement on account of the absence of his lawyer, and that by reason of the Baltimore County conviction his probation was revoked in Anne Arundel County.

These contentions, so far as they can be made at all, can be made on appeal from the action in Anne Arundel County in revoking his probation and re-sentencing him, — or in Baltimore County in convicting him of larceny — and not on habeas corpus. Petitioner alleges no facts which required appointment of counsel on the hearing for violation of probation.

Application denied, with costs.


Summaries of

Bowen v. Warden

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jul 15, 1952
90 A.2d 174 (Md. 1952)
Case details for

Bowen v. Warden

Case Details

Full title:BOWEN v . WARDEN OF MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Jul 15, 1952

Citations

90 A.2d 174 (Md. 1952)
90 A.2d 174

Citing Cases

Young v. Warden

This can be raised on appeal but not on habeas corpus. Bowen v. Warden, 200 Md. 661, 90 A.2d 174. Application…

Sykes v. Warden

Contentions as to the manner in which evidence was obtained may be made on a motion for a new trial, or on…