From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Secretary v. Hopkins

Court of Appeals of Maryland
May 4, 1979
285 Md. 120 (Md. 1979)

Opinion

[No. 103, September Term, 1978.]

Decided May 4, 1979.

CERTIORARI — Dismissed As Improvidently Granted. pp. 120-121

Certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals. (Hopkins — Baltimore City Court, Ross, J.) (Conley — Circuit Court for Washington County, Rutledge, J.) (Mosley — Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Turk, J.)

The cause was argued before MURPHY, C.J., and SMITH, DIGGES, ELDRIDGE, ORTH and COLE, JJ.

H. Edgar Lentz, Assistant Attorney General, with whom were George A. Nilson, Deputy Attorney General, and James J. Doyle, III, Assistant Attorney General, on the brief, for appellants.

Richard L. North for appellee Charles Hopkins. Edward J. Levin, with whom were Piper Marbury on the brief, for appellee Billy Mosley. Submitted on brief by Cornell Conley, in proper person.


ORDER

Certiorari having been granted in these cases to review decisions of the Court of Special Appeals interpreting Division of Correction Regulation 105-2 governing violations of institutional rules which occurred in September of 1976; and it appearing that the pertinent provisions of Regulation 105-2 were revised by the Division of Correction, effective September 1, 1978, following modification of a consent decree previously entered by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland; and it further appearing, in view of the revisions to Regulation 105-2, that the appeals in these cases are of no prospective importance, it is, therefore, this 4th day of May, 1979,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the writs of certiorari be, and they are hereby, dismissed, the petitions having been improvidently granted. Costs to be paid by the State of Maryland.


Summaries of

Secretary v. Hopkins

Court of Appeals of Maryland
May 4, 1979
285 Md. 120 (Md. 1979)
Case details for

Secretary v. Hopkins

Case Details

Full title:SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ET AL. v…

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: May 4, 1979

Citations

285 Md. 120 (Md. 1979)

Citing Cases

Md. Comm'n on Human Rel. v. Beth. Steel

Such a question ordinarily is and should be finally determined by the agency before recourse to the courts.…

Massey v. Dept. of Corrections

Neither the Secretary nor the Commissioner could simply abrogate them and put nothing in their place, or…