UNITED STATES EX REL. SOGAN
v.
RAGEN, WARDEN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the dismissal of the prisoner's petition.
Petitioner, a prisoner convicted of robbery, sought to appeal the dismissal of his petition after exhausting state remedies. His applications for paro…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concurrent Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
KERNER, Circuit Judge.
Petitioner is a prisoner in the Illinois State Penitentiary, pursuant to three judgments of conviction of an Illinois state court for robbery. From an order dismissing his petition, brought in the District ■Court after he had exhausted all his remedies in the state courts, he seeks permission of this court to prosecute an appeal in forma pauperis.
On September 12, 1935, the Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois, upon his plea of guilty to three charges of robbery, sentenced petitioner in each case to serve a term of years not to exceed the maximum term fixed by the statute for the crime of robbery, the sentences to run concurrently, and on September 19, 1935, he was com mitted to the penitentiary. The statutory penalty for robbery is for a term of years not less than one year nor more than twenty years. Chap. 38, par. 501, Smith-Hurd Ill.Rev.St.1935. On October 19, 1936, the state parole board notified petitioner that his application for parole was denied. On April 15, 1940, the board notified him that “At a meeting of the Parole Board held today, the following action was taken in your case: Outlist not approved. Continued to September 19, 1944.” On October 15, 1941, the board advised petitioner that “At a meeting of the Division of Correction held to-day, the following action was taken in your case: Parole denied. Continued to September 19, 1950.”
The question involved and the contentions made are similar to those made in United States ex rel. Rasmussen v. Ragen, 7 Cir., 146 F. 2d 516, in which an opinion was filed today. Upon the authority of that case and for the reasons stated therein, as well as those in the case of United States ex rel. Foley v. Ragen, 7 Cir., 143 F. 2d 774, 778, 779, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States ex rel. Foley v. Ragen, 143 F.2d 774 (7th Cir. 1944)
- United States ex rel. Rasmussen v. Ragen, 146 F.2d 516 (7th Cir. 1945)