Legal Opinion

Mills v. Director of Patuxent Institution

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 9, 1963No. [App. No. 50, September Term, 1963.]PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHenderson, J.

In this application for leave to appeal from a finding of defective delinquency, the petitioner raises eleven contentions, all of a general nature, which may be summarized as follows:

1. Denial of due process and equal protection of the laws;

2. Double Jeopardy;

3. The statute operates as an ex post facto law;

4. The statute imposes cruel and unusual punishment because (a) the penalty is unlimited and (b) it authorizes psychiatric experimentation on human guinea pigs;

5. The statute violates the rule against self-incrimination by authorizing (a) the use of psychiatric records and interviews and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Eggleston v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
  2. Bullock v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
  3. Simmons v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
  4. McDonough v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Simon v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  2. Oppel v. Director of Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API