Murel v. Baltimore City Criminal Court
Supreme Court of the United States
1Per curiam
Petitioners were convicted of various state crimes and sentenced to fixed terms.of imprisonment. They were then committed to the Patuxent Institution in lieu of sentence, for an indeterminate period, pursuant to the Maryland Defective Delinquency Law, Md. Ann. Code, Art. 31B. They sought federal habeas corpus, challenging on constitutional grounds the criteria and procedures that led to their commitment, and the conditions of their confinement. They contend, inter alia, that the statutory standard for commitment is impermissibly vague, that they are entitled to put the government to the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Carafas v. LaValleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Jones v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- North Carolina v. RiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Jackson v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Humphrey v. CadySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by98 opinions
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Ssih Equipment S.A. v. United States International Trade Commission and Stewart-Warner CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Lessard v. SchmidtDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1972
- Joseph F. Cuthrell v. Director, Patuxent InstitutionCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
93 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.