Opinion
[H.C. No. 35, October Term, 1955.]
Decided June 13, 1956.
HABEAS CORPUS — Sufficiency of Evidence — Alleged Mistake on Jury's Part as to Case Being Tried. The sufficiency of the evidence to convict can be reviewed only upon direct appeal, and not on habeas corpus. An allegation that the jury mistakenly believed that they were trying the case against petitioner's co-defendant (who pleaded guilty), and not the case against petitioner (who pleaded not guilty), because the latter did not take the stand, went only to the regularity of the trial and not to the point of jurisdiction. pp. 654-655
J.E.B.
Decided June 13, 1956.
Habeas corpus proceeding by John C. Walker against the Warden of the Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.
Application denied.
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. A previous application was denied in Walker v. Warden, 209 Md. 654. We find nothing in the present record that would alter the views expressed in our previous opinion, as to the alleged denial of counsel.
His present complaint seems to be that since he did not take the stand, the jury mistakenly believed they were trying the case against his co-defendant, who pleaded guilty, and not his own case, where there was a plea of not guilty. We have repeatedly held that the sufficiency of evidence to convict can be reviewed only upon direct appeal, and not on habeas corpus. The alleged mistake goes only to the regularity of the trial and not to the point of jurisdiction.
Application denied, with costs.