Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

220 Md. 667

155 A.2d 68

Docket [P.C. No. 10, September Term, 1959.]

Shifflett v. Warden

SHIFFLETT v. WARDEN OF MARYLAND PENITENTIARY

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 20, 1959.

Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 2001-09-10

Relies on Plump & Kye v. Warden · Young v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2001-09-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 2001

3 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

702001decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Before BRUNE, C.J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.

¶2PER CURIAM:

¶3For the reasons stated by Judge Oppenheimer in his opinion in the Criminal Court of Baltimore for denying Shifflett's application under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, his application for leave to appeal from the order denying relief is denied as to the contentions there presented. His contention that his hearing on his application was invalid because he was not present is untenable. His presence was not necessary. Code (1959 Supp.), Art. 27, Section 645G; Plump v. Warden,220 Md. 662, 153 A.2d 269, 270. Other contentions not presented in the trial court are not properly before this Court and will not be considered by this Court. Young v. Warden,218 Md. 636, 145 A.2d 238.

¶4Application denied.

/220/md/667 · .json · Public domain