Legal Opinion

Childress v. Director of Patuxent Institution

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 7, 1964No. App. No. 63Published

1Per curiam

In this application for leave to appeal from a determination of defective delinquency, the applicant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient is without merit. He further contends that the court was erroneously informed that his last conviction had been for burglary. In fact, the conviction was for breaking into a shop and stealing goods worth $5.00 or more *657under Code (1964 Supp.), Art. 27, sec. 33, creating a penitentiary misdemeanor. The error, if it can be deemed an error, was quite immaterial and not prejudicial, since the crime for which he was convicted met the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gee v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
  2. Hammond v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API