Summary
In Johns v. Warden, 205 Md. 644, his claims that he did not receive a copy of the indictment and was denied a chance to summons his witnesses, and his allegation, without supporting facts, that perjured testimony was used, were held not to be bases for the writ of habeas corpus.
Summary of this case from Johns v. StateOpinion
[H.C. No. 15, October Term, 1954.]
Decided November 11, 1954.
HABEAS CORPUS — Denied, on Ground That Petitioner Was Not Given Copy of Indictment. A claim by petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus that he was not given a copy of the indictment charging him with murder was no ground for the issuance of the writ, where he was represented by an attorney at his trial, and he did not allege that his attorney did not receive a copy or that he requested one. p. 645
HABEAS CORPUS — Denial of Opportunity to Obtain Witnesses. A complaint that petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus was refused an opportunity to obtain witnesses is reviewable on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. p. 645
HABEAS CORPUS — Assertion That Perjured Testimony Was Used Against Petitioner. A bald assertion that perjured testimony was deliberately used against petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus is insufficient for the issuance of the writ, in the absence of facts showing that the State's officers used testimony known to be perjured, or participated in any conspiracy to defraud petitioner of his rights. pp. 645-646
HABEAS CORPUS — Competency, Admissibility, Sufficiency of Evidence No Basis for Issuance of Writ. The competency, admissibility and sufficiency of the evidence is no basis for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. p. 646
J.E.B. Decided November 11, 1954.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Albert C. Johns against the Warden of the Maryland Penitentiary. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Reporter's Note: Petition for certiorari denied February 28, 1955. 348 U.S. 954.
Before BRUNE, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.
This is an application for leave to appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus.
Petitioner was convicted of murder on January 9, 1938, and sentenced to life imprisonment. Petitioner has petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus twenty-four times and all have been denied. This is the first application for leave to appeal to this Court.
Petitioner claims that he was not given a copy of the indictment. He was represented by an attorney at his trial and does not allege that his attorney did not receive a copy. Nor does he allege that he requested one.
Petitioner further alleges that he was denied a chance to summon his witnesses. He does not state that he complained to the trial judge about this denial or that his attorney was denied the right to summon witnesses for him. A complaint that a petitioner was refused an opportunity to obtain witnesses is reviewable on appeal, but not on habeas corpus. Bowen v. Warden, 202 Md. 646, 96 A.2d 489; Sears v. Superintendent, 202 Md. 656, 97 A.2d 133; Daisey v. Warden, 203 Md. 653, 98 A.2d 99.
Petitioner also alleges that perjured testimony was used against him, and that the evidence presented at the trial was not sufficient to justify a conviction. "A bald assertion that perjured testimony was deliberately used against him is insufficient, in the absence of `facts showing that the State's officers used testimony known to be perjured, or participated in any conspiracy to defraud petitioner of his rights.'" Reeder v. Warden, 196 Md. 683, 685, 77 A.2d 1, and cases there cited. Nor is the competency, admissibility, and sufficiency of evidence a basis for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. Sembly v. Warden, 190 Md. 744, 60 A.2d 526; Loughran v. Warden, 192 Md. 719, 64 A.2d 712; Land v. Warden, 199 Md. 694, 87 A.2d 527.
Application denied, with costs.