Opinion
No. 186, September Term, 1967.
Decided September 19, 1968.
POST CONVICTION PROCEDURE — Waiver Of Allegations — Application For Leave To Appeal Denied Where Statutory Presumption Was Not Rebutted. Application for leave to appeal was denied where applicant's third petition had failed to set forth any allegations of special circumstances tending to rebut the statutory presumption of waiver arising from his failure to raise the issues in his direct appeal or in his second post conviction petition, which was appealed. Code (1957), Art. 27, § 645A(c); Rule BK 48. p. 126
POST CONVICTION PROCEDURE — Claims Not Asserted Below Are Not Considered On Application For Leave To Appeal. Claims not asserted in the lower court will not be considered by the Court of Special Appeals on an application for leave to appeal. p. 126
Decided September 19, 1968.
Application for leave to appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore (PERROTT, J.).
Irvin Veney instituted a third proceeding under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, and, from a denial of relief, he applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied.
Before MURPHY, C.J., and ANDERSON, MORTON, ORTH, and THOMPSON, JJ.
The application of Irvin Veney for leave to appeal from an order of Judge James A. Perrott, presiding in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, denying relief prayed in a third petition under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act is denied for the reason that the petition failed to set forth any allegations of special circumstances tending to rebut the statutory (Md. Code Art. 27, Sec. 645 c; Md. Rule BK 48 as amended) presumption of waiver arising from his failure to raise the issues in his direct appeal, Veney v. State, 225 Md. 237, 170 A.2d 171 or in the second post conviction petition which was appealed, Veney v. Warden, 232 Md. 659, 194 A.2d 273. See Jones v. Warden, 2 Md. App. 343, 234 A.2d 472. It is also noted that the petitioner has also filed four habeas corpus petitions.
Veney included a supplement to his application for leave to appeal presenting additional questions regarding his conviction. Claims not asserted in the lower court will not be considered by us on an application for leave to appeal. Roe v. Director, 240 Md. 717, 214 A.2d 162.
Application denied.