MULVEY
v.
JACQUES
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 denied the petitioner's various motions and petitions, including the petition for a certificate of probable cause.
Petitioner pleaded guilty to breaking and entering and sought post-conviction relief through multiple avenues, including habeas corpus, after his moti…
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 Motion For Extension Of Time cases and more on FLexlaw
[*301] PER CURIAM.
In this case petitioner has filed petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, petition for certificate of probable cause, motion for transfer of the records, and motion for extension of time for appeal. The case has been heard upon petitioner’s brief and upon motion of respondent and appellee to dismiss petitioner’s various motions and petitions, and upon respondent’s brief.
Petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of breaking and entering in the nighttime and is imprisoned in the State House of Correction and Branch Prison at Marquette, Michigan, under sentence of 10 to 15 years imposed by the State court on August 27, 1947. A motion for new trial was filed and denied but no appeal was taken. The petitioner filed an application for habeas corpus in the State Court of Michigan, which was denied, certiorari denied March 24, 1952, 343 U.S. 910, 72 S.Ct. 643. An application to the United States Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus had been denied January 28, 1952, and an application to the same court for a writ of mandamus against the Michigan State Court was refused. The Supreme Court of Michigan in its denial of the writ of habeas corpus stated that the petitioner might properly raise his questions “only on application for leave to appeal rather than on habeas corpus,” but the petitioner did not make such application.
The processes available in the Michigan State courts for review of sentences and judgments in criminal cases are adequate. Quicksall v. Michigan, 339 U.S. 660, 70 S.Ct. 910, 94 L.Ed. 1188; Whalen v. Frisbie, 6 Cir., 185 F. 2d 607; People v. Burnstein, 261 Mich. 534, 246 N.W. 217:
Petition for the writ of habeas corpus filed in the District Court for the Western District of Michigan was denied upon the ground that petitioner had not applied to the Supreme Court of Michigan for leave to appeal from the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial. The same court denied an application for certificate of probable cause upon the ground that the petition for the writ of habeas corpus was wholly without merit.
The certificate of probable cause, where the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court, is a prerequisite to appeal under § 2253, 28 U.S.C. Since the District Court rightly held under the applicable law that the petition for the writ of habeas corpus was without merit and there is no proper basis for the proposed appeal, it is ordered that the petition for certificate of probable cause, petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, motion for transfer of the records, and motion for extension of time for appeal be and they, hereby are denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Curtis v. Tower, 262 F.2d 166 (6th Cir. 1959)
-
Anderson v. Jones, 281 F.2d 684 (6th Cir. 1960)
-
Minder v. The Assistant Dir., 229 F.2d 432 (6th Cir. 1955)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Quicksall v. Michigan, 339 U.S. 660 (U.S. 1950)
- Whalen v. Frisbie, 185 F.2d 607 (6th Cir. 1950)
- Cannady v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 910 (U.S. 1952)
- Roberts v. Frisbie, 343 U.S. 910 (U.S. 1952)