Opinion
[App. No. 63, September Term, 1965.]
Decided November 16, 1965.
POST CONVICTION PROCEDURE ACT — Claim That Lower Court Showed Prejudice At Hearing — Court Asked Petitioner Whether He Had Ever Been In Trouble Before — Alleged Attitude Of Court Was Not Relevant To Issues Raised In Petition As To Denial Of Constitutional Rights And Afforded No Support For Granting Leave To Appeal. p. 725
S.K.S.
Decided November 16, 1965.
Application for leave to appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore (BYRNES, J.).
Charles H. Tasco instituted a proceeding under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, and from a denial of relief, he applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied.
Before PRESCOTT, C.J., and HAMMOND, HORNEY, MARBURY, OPPENHEIMER and McWILLIAMS, JJ.
Judge Byrnes, in a comprehensive opinion filed in the court below, found no merit in any of the seven contentions upon which the appellant sought post conviction relief. We agree with his findings of fact and conclusions of law.
In his application for leave to appeal, applicant, in addition to the contentions raised below, now contends that the lower court showed bias and prejudice at the hearing because, prior to delivering an opinion, Judge Byrnes asked the petitioner whether he had even been in trouble before. This contention has no merit because the applicant has made no effort to demonstrate what bearing the alleged attitude of the hearing judge had on any of the matters raised in his petition. He admits that his past "trouble" is not relevant to the issues before the lower court, for his petition was directed to a denial of his constitutional rights and not his guilt or innocence. Since no constitutional defects in the proceedings below were found, the court's question affords no support for granting leave to appeal.
Application denied.