Opinion
[H.C. No. 27, September Term, 1957.]
Decided November 25, 1957. Certiorari denied, 356 U.S. 940.
HABEAS CORPUS — Search — Alleged Illegality of. The alleged illegality of a search can be raised on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. p. 658
HABEAS CORPUS — Evidence — Sufficiency of. The sufficiency of the evidence cannot be raised on habeas corpus. pp. 658-659
HABEAS CORPUS — Promises, Testimony — Alleged Use of. An allegation that perjured testimony has been used cannot be raised on habeas corpus, unless it is shown that there was collusion between the State and the witnesses, which was not shown in the instant case. p. 659
HABEAS CORPUS — Promises, Inducements and Brutality — Alleged Use of, by Police. A complaint that promises, inducements and brutality were used against petitioner by police officers is pertinent on appeal in testing the voluntary character of a statement or a confession, but cannot be raised on habeas corpus. It did not appear in the instant case that a confession was used against petitioner. p. 659
HABEAS CORPUS — Counsel — Ability to Call. A complaint that petitioner could not call his attorney was of no avail on habeas corpus, where the record showed that an attorney was appointed for him and represented him in the trial of the case. p. 659
HABEAS CORPUS — Counsel — Unsupported Allegations of Incompetency Insufficient. Unsupported allegations of the incompetency of an attorney cannot be a ground for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus. In this proceeding it was not shown that petitioner complained to the court about his attorney, and his contention that the trial judge would allow him only to answer questions, and would not let him speak for himself, was an unsupported and unconvincing allegation. A complaint that petitioner's counsel failed to call witnesses as requested by him, because his counsel did not think they would be helpful to him, also goes to the competency of counsel. The attorney might well have thought that it was useless to ask for a new trial. p. 659
HABEAS CORPUS — Showing Previous Acquittal. A complaint that the State would not allow petitioner to bring out the fact that he had been previously tried on another charge and acquitted goes only to the regularity of the trial and cannot be raised on habeas corpus. p. 659
HABEAS CORPUS — Bail — Amount of. After trial and conviction, the question of the amount of bail cannot be raised on habeas corpus, in the absence of a pending appeal. p. 660
CRIMINAL LAW — Sentences within Maximum Limits Not Excessive. Sentences within the maximum limits for the crimes for which an accused has been convicted are not excessive. p. 660
J.E.B.
Decided November 25, 1957.
Habeas corpus proceeding by William Jones, Jr., against the Warden of the Maryland Penitentiary. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied, with costs.
This is an application by William Jones, Jr., for leave to appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus by Chief Judge John B. Gontrum, of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County.
Petitioner was tried and convicted of robbery with a deadly weapon, larceny, burglary, and assault with intent to murder, in the Criminal Court of Baltimore and sentenced to forty years in the Maryland Penitentiary.
Petitioner contends that a gun, which was found in his house due to an illegal search, was offered in evidence against him. The alleged illegality of a search can be raised on appeal but not on habeas corpus. Wilhelm v. Warden, 209 Md. 624, 120 A.2d 195.
Petitioner further contends that perjured, false, and "absurd" testimony was used against him. The sufficiency of the evidence and the allegation that perjured testimony has been used cannot be raised on habeas corpus unless it is shown there was collusion between the State and the witnesses. Height v. Director, 209 Md. 647, 120 A.2d 911. This is not shown in this case.
Petitioner further complains that his counsel failed to call witnesses as requested by him, because his counsel did not think they would be helpful to him. This goes to the competency of counsel which is hereinafter discussed.
Petitioner further contends that promises, inducements, and brutality were used against him by the police officers. Such a contention is pertinent on appeal in testing the voluntariness of the statements or confession but cannot be raised on habeas corpus. Johnson v. Warden, 212 Md. 652, 129 A.2d 84. Furthermore, it does not appear from the record before us that a confession was used against him.
Petitioner further contends that he could not call his attorney. However, the record shows that an attorney was appointed for him and represented him in the trial of the case.
Petitioner says his attorney did not properly represent him. It is not shown that he complained to the court about his attorney. Canter v. Warden, 211 Md. 643, 127 A.2d 139. Unsupported allegations of incompetency of an attorney cannot be a ground for issuance of the writ of habeas corpus. Johnson v. Warden, supra. Petitioner's contention that the trial judge would only allow him to answer questions and would not let him speak for himself is an unsupported allegation and not convincing.
As to petitioner's allegation that his lawyer did not come to see him after the trial so he could ask for a new trial, his attorney might well have thought that such procedure was useless.
Petitioner further complains that the State would not allow him to bring out the fact that he had previously been tried on another charge and acquitted. This goes only to the regularity of the trial and cannot be raised on habeas corpus. Also, it is difficult to see how such evidence would have helped him.
Petitioner further complains that excessive bail was required of him before trial. After trial and conviction, the question of the amount of bail cannot be raised on habeas corpus, in the absence of a pending appeal. Lievers v. Warden, 210 Md. 670, 124 A.2d 844.
Petitioner also complains that his sentences were excessive. The docket entries in these cases show that he was sentenced, dating from September 17, 1956, for robbery with a deadly weapon to 20 years; for assault with intent to murder to 15 years; for burglary to 1 year; and for larceny of an automobile to 4 years, all in the Maryland Penitentiary, all sentences to run consecutively, making a total of 40 years. All of these sentences were within the maximum limits for the crimes for which he was convicted.
Application denied, with costs.