Legal Opinion
Gee v. State
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided July 30, 1965No. [No. 450, September Term, 1964.]PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOppEnhEimer, J.
In this petition for relief under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, the petitioner claims that his commitment to Patuxent Institution as a defective delinquent was illegal because his conviction of statutory burglary, the crime which made his commitment possible under the Defective Delinquency Act, was in violation of his constitutional rights and therefore of itself illegal.
The history of the prior proceedings in which the Appellant was involved is succinctly set forth by the State, as follows:
“The Appellant was convicted of burglary in the Criminal Court of Baltimore on October 9, 1956,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Height v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961
- Eggleston v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
- Manning v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Director of Patuxent Institution v. DANIELS OF PATUXENT INSTITUTIONCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
- Gee v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1967
- Creswell v. Director, Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1967
- Watson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
- Feldman v. Director, Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.