From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barr v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jul 15, 1952
90 A.2d 216 (Md. 1952)

Opinion

[H.C. No. 4, October Term, 1952 (Adv.).]

Decided July 15, 1952.

HABEAS CORPUS — Arrest Without Warrant — Illegal Search and Seizure. Contentions of a petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus that he was arrested twice by breaking into his apartment and that evidence was obtained by unconstitutional, unlawful search and seizure cannot be made on habeas corpus. pp. 657-658

Decided July 15, 1952.

Habeas corpus proceeding by Jerome Barr against Warden of Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.

Application denied.

Before MARBURY, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.


This is an application for leave to appeal from denial of a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner is imprisoned under sentence for ten years for violations of the narcotics laws. He alleges that he was twice arrested (the second time while on bail for the first alleged offense) without a warrant by breaking into "an apartment" (not expressly, but inferentially alleged to be his) and not clearly, but perhaps by inference, that evidence was obtained by unconstitutional, unlawful search and seizure. These contentions could all have been made on motion for a new trial or on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. Loughran v. Warden, 192 Md. 719, 64 A.2d 712.

Application denied, with costs.


Summaries of

Barr v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jul 15, 1952
90 A.2d 216 (Md. 1952)
Case details for

Barr v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

Case Details

Full title:BARR v . WARDEN OF MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Jul 15, 1952

Citations

90 A.2d 216 (Md. 1952)
90 A.2d 216

Citing Cases

Sykes v. Warden

Contentions as to the manner in which evidence was obtained may be made on a motion for a new trial, or on…

Presley v. Warden

This Court has repeatedly stated that the legality of a search and seizure may be raised on appeal but cannot…