Opinion
[H.C. No. 23, October Term, 1956.]
Decided November 9, 1956.
EVIDENCE — Habeas Corpus Petition — Examining Public Records. It is proper to examine public records to determine whether to grant an application for habeas corpus. Code (1951), Art. 42, sec. 5. p. 640
HABEAS CORPUS — Communication with Friends or Lawyer. A contention that petitioner was not permitted to communicate with his friends or a lawyer can be raised on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. p. 641
HABEAS CORPUS — Sufficient Opportunity to Present Defense. A contention that petitioner was not given a sufficient opportunity to present his defense can be raised on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. p. 641
HABEAS CORPUS — Conviction on Past Criminal Record. A contention that petitioner was convicted on his past criminal record can be raised on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. p. 641
JUSTICES OF THE PEACE — Jurisdiction in Assault and Battery Cases. A Justice of the Peace has jurisdiction to try assault and battery cases. p. 641
HABEAS CORPUS — Grounds Raised on Application for Leave to Appeal After Petition Denied Below. Grounds for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, raised for the first time by petitioner on his application for leave to appeal after his petition had been considered and denied below, were not properly before the Court of Appeals. p. 641
J.E.B.
Decided November 9, 1956.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Lloyd Ransom Roberts against the Warden of the Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied.
Before BRUNE, C.J., and COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.
Lloyd Ransom Roberts was tried and convicted on June 1, 1956, before Magistrate H. Reese Shoemaker, Jr., of Frederick County, on a charge of assault and battery. His petition for a writ of habeas corpus was submitted to Judge Stedman Prescott in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County and was denied by him.
Petitioner alleges that he was not asked to waive his right to a jury trial and did not freely elect to be tried before the trial magistrate. Judge Prescott, in passing upon the application, had before him the original commitment order which is in absolute contradiction of this claim. Examination of this public record in determining whether or not to grant the application is proper in habeas corpus. Code (1951), Article 42, § 5; Bernard v. Warden, 187 Md. 273, 49 A.2d 737; White v. Warden, 211 Md. 623, 126 A.2d 294.
Petitioner further alleges: (1) that he was not permitted to communicate with his friends or a lawyer; (2) that he was not given a sufficient opportunity to present his defense; (3) that he was convicted on his past criminal record. All of these contentions could have been raised on appeal, but may not on habeas corpus. Heddings v. Superintendent, 193 Md. 722, 68 A.2d 675; Paff v. Warden, 200 Md. 660, 90 A.2d 173.
Another contention of the petitioner goes to the jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace to try assault and battery cases. This contention was rejected in a recent case which goes into the matter fully and further discussion is unnecessary. See Yantz v. Warden, 210 Md. 343, 123 A.2d 601.
Sundry other grounds were raised by petitioner on his application for leave to appeal after his petition had been considered and denied. These additional grounds are not properly before us. Walker v. Warden, 209 Md. 654, 121 A.2d 714.
Application denied, with costs.