Bristow v. Warden of Maryland Penitentiary

Per Curiam. The applicant’s petition for post conviction relief below sets forth six grounds: “ (1) That he was denied due process of law because one of the jurors who heard his case was the father of a key witness for the prosecution, and that the relationship was known to the State’s Attorney, the Sheriff, and the Clerk of the Court before the jury was sworn; (2) Illegal arrest, without a warrant; (3) Illegal search and seizure, without warrant or probable cause; (4) Conviction obtained by the use of inadmissible evidence; (5) Inadequate trial attorney, failed to object to inadmissible evidence, and informed petitioner he could not appeal the conviction as he lacked grounds for appeal, and (6) The trial court failed to provide petitioner with the equal protection of the law; failure to inform the petitioner of the witnesses against him or to name the witnesses on the face of the indictment, or to provide him with a copy of the indictment until a few minutes before trial; failed to provide a fair and impartial jury; failure to inquire into the legality of his arrest or the evidence used against him; failed to inform him of his right to appeal, and recited a false account of the petitioner’s criminal record.” Judge Rasin, sitting in the