Opinion
[P.C. No. 80, September Term, 1959.]
Decided March 18, 1960.
POST CONVICTION PROCEDURE ACT — Search And Seizure, Validity Of — Preliminary Hearing, Alleged Lack Of. Neither the validity of a search and seizure, nor the alleged lack of a preliminary hearing, can be raised in a post conviction proceeding. p. 595
J.E.B.
Decided March 18, 1960.
Amos E. Ward instituted a proceeding under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, and from a denial of relief, he applied for leave to appeal.
Reporter's Note: Certiorari denied, 363 U.S. 816.
Before BRUNE, C.J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.
Application for leave to appeal from a denial of post conviction relief is denied for the reasons set out in the opinion of the court below. See also Ward v. State, 219 Md. 559. It is significant that, in that appeal, no contention was raised as to the validity of a search and seizure of his automobile, following his arrest for drunken driving. It cannot be raised in this proceeding. Mears v. Warden, 220 Md. 682. The same thing is true of the alleged lack of preliminary hearing. Cf. Culley v. Warden, 218 Md. 639.