Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Howard E. Leigh v. R. J. Gaffney, Warden, Kansas State Penitentiary, Lansing, Kansas, 432 F.2d 923, 10th Cir. (1970)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    13 views1 page
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in a case regarding habeas corpus relief. The appellant, Howard E. Leigh, was notified that the court was considering summary affirmance. The appellee then filed a motion to affirm, and Leigh was given an opportunity to oppose summary affirmance by filing a memorandum, which he did. However, the court denied Leigh's motions for appointment of counsel and oral argument. The single issue presented - whether Leigh must first exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief - was deemed so unsubstantial that it did not warrant further argument. Therefore, the court granted the appellee's motion and affirmed the district court's judgment for the reasons

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1970-10-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 432 F.2d 923 Docket: 312-70_1

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in a case regarding habeas corpus relief. The appellant, Howard E. Leigh, was notified that the court was considering summary affirmance. The appellee then filed a motion to affirm, and Leigh was given an opportunity to oppose summary affirmance by filing a memorandum, which he did. However, the court denied Leigh's motions for appointment of counsel and oral argument. The single issue presented - whether Leigh must first exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief - was deemed so unsubstantial that it did not warrant further argument. Therefore, the court granted the appellee's motion and affirmed the district court's judgment for the reasons

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    13 views1 page

    Howard E. Leigh v. R. J. Gaffney, Warden, Kansas State Penitentiary, Lansing, Kansas, 432 F.2d 923, 10th Cir. (1970)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in a case regarding habeas corpus relief. The appellant, Howard E. Leigh, was notified that the court was considering summary affirmance. The appellee then filed a motion to affirm, and Leigh was given an opportunity to oppose summary affirmance by filing a memorandum, which he did. However, the court denied Leigh's motions for appointment of counsel and oral argument. The single issue presented - whether Leigh must first exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief - was deemed so unsubstantial that it did not warrant further argument. Therefore, the court granted the appellee's motion and affirmed the district court's judgment for the reasons

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 1

    432 F.

    2d 923

    Howard E. LEIGH, Appellant,


    v.
    R. J. GAFFNEY, Warden, Kansas State Penitentiary, Lansing,
    Kansas, Appellee.
    No. 312-70.

    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.


    Oct. 5, 1970.

    Kent Frizzell, Atty. Gen., and Edward G. Collister, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen.,
    for appellee.
    Howard E. Leigh, pro se.
    Before LEWIS, Chief Judge, PICKETT, Circuit Judge, and KERR,
    District judge.
    PER CURIAM.

    Leigh was notified that the court was considering summary affirmance and
    appellee thereafter filed a motion to affirm. Leigh was afforded an opportunity
    to file a memorandum addressing the merits of the cause and opposing
    summary affirmance, which he has done. He has also filed a motion for
    appointment of counsel and for oral argument. These motions are denied.

    From examination of the file and record in this case, it is manifest that the
    single question presented, the necessity that Leigh first exhaust available state
    remedies before seeking federal habeas relief, is so unsubstantial as not to
    warrant further argument.

    Accordingly, the motion of appellee is granted and the judgment of the district
    court is affirmed for the reasons stated in the Memorandum and Order of the
    district court, 318 F.Supp. 85 (D.Kan.1970).

    You might also like