Slater v. Warden of Md. Penitentiary
Decision Date | 12 December 1963 |
Docket Number | No. 25,25 |
Citation | 233 Md. 609,195 A.2d 675 |
Parties | Warner SLATER v. WARDEN OF the MARYLAND PENITENTIARY. Post Conviction |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Before BRUNE, C. J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT, HORNEY, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.
On the evening of November 24, 1959, Warner Slater, the applicant for leave to appeal, along with two other persons, participated in two robberies. The trio, their faces shrouded in silk stockings, held up at gunpoint the owner of a drug store and then the proprietor of a liquor store, making off with some $600.00. One of the fugitives was shot killed as he fled from the liquor store, and Slater and another, Collins E. Miller, were apprehended by the police.
Slater and Miller were convicted of robbery with a deadly weapon in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, and, on January 15, 1960, were sentenced to twenty years in the Maryland Penitentiary for each robbery, the sentences to run consecutively. They appealed to this Court, contending that the evidence was insufficient to convict. We affirmed. Miller v. State, 223 Md. 354, 164 A.2d 715. Thereafter, Slater petitioned the Baltimore City Court for a writ of habeas corpus, which was refused by Judge Oppenheimer on November 9, 1962. An application for the same writ directed to the United States District Court was denied by Judge Thomsen.
Applicant filed a petition in the Criminal Court of Baltimore under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, which was denied by Judge Cullen on April 25, 1963. He now seeks leave to appeal.
In his discursive petition Slater listed eight separate grounds for relief, as follows:
We have examined the State's brief in Slater's appeal to this Court and find that the presentation of facts in it is substantiated by the record; in addition, it does not differ in any material respect from appellant's statement of facts, and, of course, it was not under oath. Petitioner's allegation of perjury by the lawyer for the State has no merit.
We have said many times that illegality of arrest as Such may not be raised effectively in a post conviction proceeding. Warrington v. Warden, 222 Md. 601, 159 A.2d 360; Brooks v. Warden, 218 Md. 650, 145 A.2d 569; Culley v. Warden, 218 Md. 639, 145 A.2d 226. Likewise, the question of the sufficiency of the evidence, which Slater poses in his third and fourth contentions, may not be raised in an application for post conviction relief. Fisher v. Warden, 230 Md. 612, 185 A.2d 198, and cases cited therein.
Slater's fifth and seventh assertions were rejected by Judge...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Brown
...or the sufficiency of the evidence to convict, are not open on post conviction. Duff v. Warden, Md., 200 A.2d 78, 80; Slater v. Warden, 233 Md. 609, 611, 195 A.2d 675; Harrington v. Warden, 232 Md. 621, 626, 192 A.2d 778; Drehoff v. Warden, 231 Md. 654, 656, 191 A.2d 421. The appellee seeks......
-
Ledbetter v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
...taken from his house as a result of the alleged illegal search. Cf. Young v. Warden, 233 Md. 596, 599, 195 A.2d 713, and Slater v. Warden, 233 Md. 609, 611, 195 A.2d 675. The only tangible property offered in evidence was a ring belonging to the decedent recovered from one of the other boys......
-
Hyde v. Warden of Md. Penitentiary
...639, 649, 191 A.2d 594; Drehoff v. Warden, 231 Md. 654, 656, 191 A.2d 421; Kohne v. Warden, 232 Md. 633, 192 A.2d 761; Slater v. Warden, 233 Md. 609, 611, 195 A.2d 675; Bucholtz v. Warden, 233 Md. 614, 195 A.2d 690; Dyson v. Warden, 233 Md. 630, 196 A.2d 455. Judge Berry made no actual find......
-
Greene v. Warden, Md. Penitentiary, 121
...proceeding. Fisher v. Warden, 230 Md. 612, 185 A.2d 198 (1962); Tyner v. Warden, 232 Md. 666, 194 A.2d 793 (1963); Slater v. Warden, 233 Md. 609, 195 A.2d 675 (1963); Duff v. Warden, 234 Md. 646, 648, 200 A.2d 78 (1964); State v. Brown, 235 Md. 401, 404, 201 A.2d 852 (1964) (Post Conviction......