Legal Opinion

Wilson v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 14, 1976No. 831PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLowe, J.

The only significant holding of this opinion is that a trial judge may not order a second evaluation to determine delinquency by Patuxent authorities before the subject is provided a determination hearing (Md. Code, Art. 31B, § 8 (c)) upon the first evaluation of Patuxent authorities, once they have reported their findings that he was a defective delinquent.

On June 14, 1974 appellant was ordered by the Criminal Court of Baltimore to submit to an examination to determine whether he was a defective delinquent. Five months later (November 19, 1974) the Patuxent authorities reported the results…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Scherr v. BraunCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1957
  2. Bullock v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
  3. Restivo v. Princeton Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
  4. Williams & Fulwood v. Director, Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  5. Austin v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1967

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Moss v. DirectorCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  2. Moss v. DirectorCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API