Maryland Code
Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 (2026)
§ 10-210
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MD-GAmgaleg.maryland.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§10–210.
(a) A court may not consider an individual’s grievance that is within the jurisdiction of the Office or the Office of Administrative Hearings unless the individual has exhausted the remedies provided in this subtitle.
(b) (1) The complainant is entitled to judicial review of the final decision of the Secretary under § 10–207(b)(2)(ii) or § 10–209(b)(1)(ii) or (c)(3)(ii) of this subtitle.
(2) Proceedings for review shall be instituted in the circuit court of the county in which the complainant is confined.
(3) Review by the court shall be limited to:
(i) a review of the record of the proceedings before the Office and the Office of Administrative Hearings and any order issued by the Secretary following those proceedings; and
(ii) a determination of whether the complainant’s rights under federal or State law were violated.
(c) (1) The Administrative Procedure Act does not apply to appellate review of a final judgment of the circuit court under this section.
(2) A party aggrieved by the decision of the circuit court may file an application for leave to appeal to the Appellate Court of Maryland in accordance with the Maryland Rules.
(a) A court may not consider an individual’s grievance that is within the jurisdiction of the Office or the Office of Administrative Hearings unless the individual has exhausted the remedies provided in this subtitle.
(b) (1) The complainant is entitled to judicial review of the final decision of the Secretary under § 10–207(b)(2)(ii) or § 10–209(b)(1)(ii) or (c)(3)(ii) of this subtitle.
(2) Proceedings for review shall be instituted in the circuit court of the county in which the complainant is confined.
(3) Review by the court shall be limited to:
(i) a review of the record of the proceedings before the Office and the Office of Administrative Hearings and any order issued by the Secretary following those proceedings; and
(ii) a determination of whether the complainant’s rights under federal or State law were violated.
(c) (1) The Administrative Procedure Act does not apply to appellate review of a final judgment of the circuit court under this section.
(2) A party aggrieved by the decision of the circuit court may file an application for leave to appeal to the Appellate Court of Maryland in accordance with the Maryland Rules.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37
cases (25 in the last 5 years), 2004–2026 · leading case: Jean Germain v. Bobby Shearin, 653 F. App'x 231 (4th Cir. 2016).
Jean Germain v. Bobby Shearin, 653 F. App'x 231 (4th Cir. 2016). “2015); Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 (a) (inmate may not file in court until he or she has exhausted administrative remedies), § 10-206 (inmate must satisfy procedures contained in Division of Correction’s regulations before final step).”
Conaway v. State Johnson v. State, 212 A.3d 348 (Md. 2019). “, MD. CODE , CORR. SERVS. § 10-210 (stating: "[a] party aggrieved by the decision of the circuit court may file an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Special Appeals in accordance with the Maryland Rules.”
Harris v. McKenzie, 211 A.3d 685 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2019). “Code, § 10-210(c)(2) of the Correctional Services Article ("CS").”
Demby v. Sec'y, Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Serv., 877 A.2d 187 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2005). “See Md. Code Corr. Serv's. § 10-210(b)(3) (1999).”
Patrick v. Sec'y, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Servs., 847 A.2d 450 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2004). “Maryland Code (1999), § 10-210(c) of the Correctional Services Article provides that an inmate may only obtain review in this Court by filing an application for leave to appeal in accordance with the Maryland Rules.”
Demby v. Sec'y, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Servs., 877 A.2d 187 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2005). “See Md.Code Corr. Serv's. § 10-210(b)(3) (1999).”
Harris v. McKenzie (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2019). “Code, § 10-210(c)(2) of the Correctional Services Article (“CS”).”
Germain v. Shearin (D. Md. 2019). “Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 . Here, the Warden has submitted evidence, in the form of declarations from relevant personnel, establishing that neither the Commissioner of Correction nor the IGO has any record of receiving an appeal from Germain relating to ARP No.”
Burgess v. Wehn (D. Md. 2019). “Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 . It is clear from the record evidence that Burgess failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to his claim.”
Levy v. Green (D. Md. 2019). “See Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 (a).”
Corporal v. Weber (D. Md. 2022). “See Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210 (a).”
Brown v. Warden (D. Md. 2022). “See Md. Code Ann. Corr. Servs. § 10-210 (final agency determination is subject to review in circuit court and thereafter in the Court of Special Appeals); Md Code.”
Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210(a): 4 cases
Jones, Jr. v. LTS (D. Md. 2023).
Smith v. Armstead (D. Md. 2023).
Smith v. Armstead (D. Md. 2023).
King v. Weber (D. Md. 2025).
Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210(b)(3): 2 cases
Demby v. Sec'y, Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Serv., 877 A.2d 187 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2005). “See Md. Code Corr. Serv's. § 10-210(b)(3) (1999).”
Demby v. Sec'y, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Servs., 877 A.2d 187 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2005). “See Md.Code Corr. Serv's. § 10-210(b)(3) (1999).”
Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210(c): 1 case
Patrick v. Sec'y, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr. Servs., 847 A.2d 450 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2004). “Maryland Code (1999), § 10-210(c) of the Correctional Services Article provides that an inmate may only obtain review in this Court by filing an application for leave to appeal in accordance with the Maryland Rules.”
Md. Code Ann., Corr. Servs. § 10-210(c)(2): 2 cases
Harris v. McKenzie, 211 A.3d 685 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2019). “Code, § 10-210(c)(2) of the Correctional Services Article ("CS").”
Harris v. McKenzie (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2019). “Code, § 10-210(c)(2) of the Correctional Services Article (“CS”).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.