Gee v. Director of Patuxent Institution
| Decision Date | 08 March 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 56,56 |
| Citation | 188 A.2d 565,231 Md. 610 |
| Parties | Samuel GEE v. DIRECTOR OF the PATUXENT INSTITUTION. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Before BRUNE, C. J., and HENDERSON, HORNEY, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.
This is an application for leave to appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, dated November 21, 1962, finding the applicant to be a defective delinquent, after a hearing before Judge Barrett, sitting without a jury, and recommitting him to the Patuxent Institution as a defective delinquent.
In September 1956, the applicant was convicted of burglary and sentenced to the Maryland State Reformatory for Males for a term of not exceeding three years. After being redetermined to be a defective delinquent, the applicant now contends that since he was convicted only once, he was not a proper subject for a defective delinquency proceeding.
Code (1957, 1962 Cum.Supp.), Article 31B, § 6, provides in part:
'A request may be made that a person be examined for possible defective delinquency if he has been convicted and sentenced in a court of this State for a crime or offense committed on or after June 1, 1954, coming under one or more of the following categories: (1) A felony; (2) a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary; * * *.'
It matters not whether the applicant was convicted of common law burglary, a felony, or statutory burglary, a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, since either crime would be within the provisions of the section quoted above, and subject the applicant to a proceeding for defective delinquency.
Application denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gee v. State
...to Appeal to the Court of Appeals from that decision was denied by the Court of Appeals on March 8th, 1963. Gee v. Director of Patuxent Institution, (1963), 231 Md. 610, 188 A.2d 565. A Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus was denied, without prejudice, by the U. S. District......
-
Gee v. State
...Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland which was denied on March 8, 1963. See Gee v. Director of Patuxent Institution, 231 Md. 610, 188 A.2d 565 (1963). Appellant also filed an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court for the D......
-
Morgan v. Director of Patuxent Inst.
...all of which are without merit, and are answered by prior decisions in Eggleston v. State, 209 Md. 504, 121 A.2d 698; Gee v. Director, 231 Md. 610, 188 A.2d 565; Porter v. Director, 232 Md. 639, 193 A.2d 63, and Pierson v. Director, 235 Md. 654, 202 A.2d 644. The crimes for which he was sen......
-
Porter v. Director of Patuxent Institution
...defective delinquency because he was convicted only once, is without merit. The same complaint was made and rejected in Gee v. Director, 231 Md. 610, 188 A.2d 565 (1963), where it was pointed out that under the terms of Sec. 6(a) of Art. 31B a request for such an examination may be made for......