Opinion · Mdlaw Maryland

BRENNAN v. WARDEN, 197 Md. 691 (1951)

80 A.2d 9

Type
Opinion
Court
Mdlaw Maryland
Jurisdiction
Mdlaw
Date
1951-04-11
Topic
general

BRENNAN v. WARDEN, 197 Md. 691 (1951) 80 A.2d 9 BRENNAN v. WARDEN OF MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION [H.C. No. 30, October Term, 1950.]Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided April 11, 1951.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed BRENNAN v. WARDEN, 197 Md. 691 (1951). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

BRENNAN v. WARDEN,197 Md. 691(1951)
80 A.2d 9
BRENNANv. WARDEN OF MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION
[H.C. No. 30, October Term, 1950.]
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
Decided April 11, 1951.
HABEAS CORPUS —Consecutive Sentences. Where petitioner has not served the full terms of the first of two sentences, which he contends run concurrently and not consecutively with two later sentences, he is lawfully imprisoned and not entitled to release onhabeas corpus. p. 692Decided April 11, 1951.
Habeas corpusproceeding by Donald L. Brennan against Warden of Maryland House of Correction. From a refusal of the writ, petitioner applied for leave to appeal.

Application denied.
Before MARBURY, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, GRASON, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.
DELAPLAINE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
Donald L. Brennan, a prisoner in the Maryland House of Correction, has applied here for leave to appeal from refusal of a writ ofhabeas corpus.

Petitioner alleges that on July 13, 1950, he was found guilty by a trial magistrate for Prince George's CountyPage 692on two criminal charges and was sentenced to the House of Correction for six months on one charge and three months on the other, the sentences to run consecutively; and that on September 11, 1950, he was found guilty by the same trial magistrate on two other charges, and was sentenced to the House of Correction for six months on one charge and three months on the other, the sentences to run consecutively.

Petitioner contends that the trial magistrate had no right to make the sentences run consecutively. As Judge Tucker, who refused to issue the writ, pointed out, even if it be assumed that the two former sentences run concurrently with the latter two, nevertheless the latter two will not terminate until nine months after the beginning of the imprisonment in September, 1950,i.e.,in June, 1951.

As petitioner has not shown that he is illegally imprisoned, his application must be denied.Application denied, with costs.