Chase v. Warden, Md. House of Correction, 98

Citation216 Md. 627,139 A.2d 508
Decision Date21 March 1958
Docket NumberNo. 98,98
PartiesEdgar A. CHASE v. WARDEN, MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION. Application
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland

Before BRUNE, C. J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner's sole contention in this application for leave to appeal from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus is that he is entitled to have time spent by him on parole credited to his original sentence. Whether a person returned to custody for violation of parole is to receive such credit is a matter resting in the discretion of the Board of Parole and Probation. Article 41, section 115, Code (1957). A failure of the Board to exercise its discretion so as to grant credit does not deprive the petitioner of any constitutional right, even if we assume, without deciding, that such a question could be raised on habeas corpus. Clark v. Warden, 213 Md. 641, 642, 131 A.2d 396.

Application denied, with costs.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Woods v. Steiner
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • August 3, 1962
    ...of Appeals of Maryland upon no fewer than eight occasions. Carolina v. Director, 217 Md. 379, 142 A.2d 602 (1958); Chase v. Warden, 216 Md. 627, 139 A.2d 508 (1958); Woolford v. Warden, 215 Md. 640, 137 A.2d 646 (1958); Phillips v. Warden, 215 Md. 632, 137 A.2d 713 (1958); Clark v. Warden, ......
  • State v. Ewell, 236
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • March 6, 1964
    ...under that section to allow or disallow credit for the 'time spent in the community under parole supervision.' Cf. Chase v. Warden, 216 Md. 627, 139 A.2d 508, and Mayo v. Warden, 231 Md. 635, 190 A.2d 810. But time spent in a mental institution can hardly fall into that category. We must lo......
  • Mayo v. Warden of Md. Penitentiary
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • May 15, 1963
    ...in situations involving the exercise of the Board's discretion. E. g., Carolina v. Director, 217 Md. 379, 142 A.2d 603; Chase v. Warden, 216 Md. 627, 139 A.2d 508; Woolford v. Warden, 215 Md. 640, 137 A.2d 646, to name just a few. Therefore, there is no basis for the contention of unconstit......
  • Calp v. Warden of Md. House of Correction, s. 104
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • March 21, 1958
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT