Opinion ID: 2331174
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Sentence for Attempted Offense Equal to Sentence for Completed Crime.

Text: On the same day when Judge Manley's opinion and order denying Cooper's petition were filed in the Baltimore City Court, Cooper mailed to the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas, of Baltimore, what he called a Supplement and Amendment to his original petition, by which he sought to challenge the legality of his sentence. In accordance with the Rules of the Supreme Bench of Baltimore City, petitions for writs of habeas corpus filed in any of the courts of the City of Baltimore or with any of the judges thereof are referred to a judge sitting in the Baltimore City Court. Cooper's original petition had accordingly been referred to Judge Manley, and his Supplement and Amendment was transmitted to the office of the Clerk of the Baltimore City Court and was filed there on April 8, 1957. In view of this chronology it is, of course, not referred to in Judge Manley's opinion. Cooper's notice of his desire to appeal is dated April 8, 1957, and was received by the office of the Clerk of the Baltimore City Court two days later. It seems that this question is not properly before us. Walker v. Warden, 209 Md. 654, 121 A.2d 714; Roberts v. Warden, 211 Md. 639, 126 A.2d 857. Even if it were properly before us, Cooper's contention that his sentence for an attempt to commit a crime cannot be so great as the statutory maximum penalty for the substantive offense appears unsupportable. See Casey v. Warden, 198 Md. 645, 80 A.2d 896. See also Mitchell v. State, 82 Md. 527, 34 A. 246; Roberts v. Warden, 206 Md. 246, 111 A.2d 597.