Bougknight v. Director of Patuxent Institution

Marbury, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. In September of 1960, the applicant, John Bougknight, pleaded guilty to the crime of attempted burglary and was sentenced to five years in the Maryland Penitentiary by Judge Manley. He did not appeal from this judgment and sentence. In May of 1963, an order was signed by Judge Manley transferring the applicant to Patuxent Institution for diagnosis and evaluation.

In November of 1964, after a trial by jury, he was found to be a defective delinquent and committed to Patuxent. It is from this finding that application for leave to appeal is sought. ¹⁴¹ Applicant, through his court appointed attorney, makes the following allegations: (1) Dr. Harold Boslow, the only witness for the State, refused to give any reason for his opinion that the applicant was a defective delinquent except to repeat over and over, that “he considered the entire record”; and (2) since the applicant’s term of imprisonment has already expired, and since his term ended in February 1964, some seven months before he was first adjudicated a defective delinquent, Code (1964 Cum. Supp.), Article 3IB, Section 6 (e) violates his constitutional rights under the due process clause of the Constitution of the United States and the Maryland Declaration of Rights. The applicant’s first contention attacks the sufficiency of the evidence and is no more than a bald allegation without factual support in the record.

It is a