Opinion
[H.C. No. 24, October Term, 1955.]
Decided February 9, 1956.
HABEAS CORPUS — Evidence — Sufficiency or Lack of. Contentions as to the lack or sufficiency of the evidence cannot be raised on habeas corpus. p. 632
HABEAS CORPUS — Use of Perjured Testimony. A bald assertion of perjury on the part of the State's witnesses is not enough to entitle petitioner to a writ of habeas corpus. There must be set forth facts indicating that the State's officers knowingly used perjured testimony or entered into a conspiracy to defraud the accused of his rights. p. 633
CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence within Statutory Limits — Not Reviewed. Any sentence imposed by the trial court within statutory limits is not subject to review on appeal or on habeas corpus. p. 633
CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence Need Not Run from Arrest. A sentence need not run from the time of arrest. p. 633
HABEAS CORPUS — Question of Sentence Exceeding Legal Maximum — Petitioner Must Have Served Legal Portion. A petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus cannot be heard to complain that his sentence exceeds the maximum permitted by law until he serves so much of the sentence as was within the power of the court to impose. p. 633
J.E.B.
Decided February 9, 1956.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Joseph R. Ramberg against the Warden of the Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Reporter's Note: Certiorari denied, 351 U.S. 920.
Before BRUNE, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.
The petitioner, who seeks leave to appeal from the denial of the writ of habeas corpus, offers nothing to show that the writ should be granted. He was convicted by jury of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor and sentenced to serve two years in the House of Correction. He contends that he was not operating the car, that there was no proof of intoxication, that he was not guilty, that the State's witnesses committed perjury and that the sentence was too severe. The contentions as to the lack or sufficiency of evidence may not be raised in support of the right to have the writ of habeas corpus. Canter v. Warden, 207 Md. 616; Smith v. Warden, 207 Md. 628; Medley v. Warden, 207 Md. 634; Cummings v. Warden,
206 Md. 637; Friedel v. Warden, 205 Md. 657. The bald assertion of perjury is not enough. There must be set forth facts indicating that the state's officers knowingly used perjured testimony or entered into a conspiracy to defraud the accused of his rights. France v. Warden, 205 Md. 636; Johns v. Warden, 205 Md. 644.
Petitioner's claim that the sentence was too severe was supplemented in his petition in this Court by the claim that he was in jail for fifty days before he was tried and sentenced. Code, 1955 Supp., Art. 66 1/2, § 171, allows a two year sentence for a second or subsequent convictions. This was the third conviction for petitioner. Even on appeal, any sentence imposed by the court within statutory limits, is not subject to review. Frazier v. Warden, 205 Md. 654, 656. There is no requirement that a sentence run from the time of arrest. Hands v. Warden, 205 Md. 642. If the sentence of two years, starting after petitioner had been in jail for fifty days, exceeds the maximum permitted by law, as to which we express no opinion, petitioner cannot be heard until he serves so much of the sentence as was within the power of the court to impose. Roberts v. Warden, 206 Md. 246, 254; Forrester v. Warden, 207 Md. 622, 624.
Application denied, with costs.