UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. GOLDEN FRINKS, APPELLANT,
v.
J. G. BARWICK, SUPERINTENDENT OF GATES COUNTY PRISON UNIT 014, GATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, APPELLEE
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 held that a petitioner who presented his claim to the state's highest court has exhausted state remedies, even if alternate procedures exist.
Petitioner appealed the denial of a writ of habeas corpus and bail, arguing he was denied counsel in a state proceeding where a suspended sentence was…
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 Assistance Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before the court on an appeal from an order of the district court for the Eastern District of North Carolina discharging a writ of habeas corpus. The district court also declined to admit the petitioner to bail pending this appeal. The effect of such denial was to compel the petitioner to serve out the jail sen-fence before he could have a review of its legality.
His principal claim was that he had been denied assistance of counsel in a state proceeding in which the court invoked a six months suspended sentence against him and ordered that the term be served. The district court based its action on the ground that the petitioner had failed to exhaust available state rem-e(jies_
We hold that the petitioner, having theretofore squarely presented to the Supreme Court of North Carolina his contention that he was denied counsel in the revocation proceeding, and having been denied relief in that court, he is not further obliged to pursue alternate procedures for relief in the state courts, Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963); Grundler v. North Carolina, 283 F. 2d 798 (4 Cir. 1960).
The case will, therefore, be remanded' to the district court to hear the petition for habeas corpus on its merits. The-order heretofore entered by Judge Bell, a member of this court, admitting the petitioner to bail pending the final outcome' of this case, is hereby continued in effect.
Remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hamric v. Bailey, 386 F.2d 390 (4th Cir. 1967)
-
Whitley v. State OF N.C., 357 F.2d 75 (4th Cir. 1966)
Authorities Cited
- FAY v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (U.S. 1963)
- Grundler v. State OF N.C., 283 F.2d 798 (4th Cir. 1960)