¶1Before HENDERSON, C.J., and HAMMOND, PRESCOTT, HORNEY, SYBERT and OPPENHEIMER, JJ.
¶2PER CURIAM:
¶3This application for leave to appeal from a determination of defective delinquency attacks the constitutionality of the Act on several grounds. His contentions are all answered by prior decisions of this Court. See Eggleston v. State,209 Md. 504; Meredith v. Director,226 Md. 653; Simmons v. Director,227 Md. 661; McDonogh v. Director,229 Md. 626; Williams v. Director,232 Md. 632. Robinson v. California,370 U.S. 660, relied on by the applicant is clearly distinguishable on the facts.
¶4Application denied.