Byrd v. Warden

P#r Curiam. This is the second time that a petition for leave to appeal in this Post Conviction Procedure Act case has come to this Court. On the first occasion leave to appeal was granted because of the failure of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County to appoint counsel for the petitioner, and the case was remanded for the appointment of counsel and for consideration of the new point raised by the application which had not been raised by his previous petitions for the writ of habeas corpus. Byrd v. Warden, 219 Md. 681 , 147 A. 2d 701 .

Such appointment has been made and such consideration has been had. Byrd’s two applications for leave to appeal in habeas corpus proceedings are reported under the title Byrd v. Warden at 210 Md. 662 , 124 A. 2d 284 , and 216 Md. 656 , 140 A. 2d 694 . In the latter case certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court, 357 U. S. 922 . The applicant has also filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, which has been denied.

We are not informed of the grounds for that petition. In the instant case, the applicant’s new point has been passed upon adversely to him by Judge Pugh, and it presents the only question now sought to be raised by the applicant. Byrd claimed that former