Legal Opinion

Burgess v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 22, 1959No. P. C. No. 64PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

For the reasons set forth in the opinion of Judge Digges in the court below, this application for leave to appeal under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act is denied. The applicant raised nine points of contention below, all of which go to the sufficiency of the evidence or the form of the indictment and cannot be raised under post conviction procedure. Whitley v. Warden, 209 Md. 629; Medley v. Warden, 207 Md. 634, 636. Grounds which were not raised in the proceeding in the court below may not be raised for the first time on *611appeal. Code (1959 Cum. Supp.), Art. 27, sec. 645H; Shifflett…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Medley v. Warden of Maryland House of CorrectionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  2. Whitley v. Warden of Maryland House of CorrectionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  3. Shifflett v. WardenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
  4. Culley v. WardenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Burgess v. WardenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
  2. White v. Warden of the Maryland PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
  3. Farley v. Warden of Maryland PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
  4. Cabiness v. WardenCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1967
  5. Campbell v. Warden of Maryland PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API