TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Nassif v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction

Nassif v. Warden of Md. House of Corr., 139 A.2d 345 (Md. 1958)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Maryland · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 6, 1958
Docket
No. H. C. No. 20
Judges
Hammond
Citations
139 A.2d 345216 Md. 6051958 Md. LEXIS 461

Opinion of the Court — Hammond

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Hammond, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Applicant for leave to appeal from a denial of a writ of habeas corpus by Judge Digges of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County was convicted of larceny on October 15, 1956, and sentenced to the House of Correction for three years. He complains (1) that his request at the time of trial that a bill of sale be examined by handwriting experts was denied; (2) that after conviction he asked his lawyer to file an appeal, only to be told that such an appeal would necessitate more money than the appellant had; (3) that he did not commit the offense of which he was convicted; (4) that two letters he appends to his appellate record prove that his conviction resulted from perjured testimony given at the instigation of a police officer.

Applicant’s first complaint seeks to raise a question as to the regularity of the proceedings and cannot be weighed on habeas corpus. His second contention must also fall, inasmuch as there is no allegation that he complained to the trial court either of his inability to appeal or of his dissatisfaction with the services of his counsel, or that he sought to appeal as an indigent person. Obenstine v. Warden, 198 Md. 648, 649-650 . Applicant’s claim that he did not commit the offense goes to the sufficiency of the evidence and cannot be raised on habeas corpus. School v. Warden, 198 Md. 656, 657 . Since the ground raised in the letters was not raised below, and the letters themselves were not presented below, they are not properly before this Court. Maryland Rule 885.

Application denied, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2001: 120012026peak 2001 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Hardy v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction146 A.2d 42 (Md. 2001)

Most recent

  1. Hardy v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction146 A.2d 42 (Md. 2001)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Obenstine v. Warden of Md. House of Corr., 80 A.2d 610 (Md. 1951) 11
Schaal v. Warden of Md. House of Corr., 80 A.2d 609 (Md. 1951) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list