ROBERT W. DUCKETT, APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIAM F. STEINER, WARDEN, MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION, 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 federal evidentiary hearing is unnecessary when a state post-conviction proceeding has already provided a full and fair hearing on the issue.
Petitioner appealed the denial of a writ of habeas corpus after a state judge found his claim of knowingly used perjured testimony to be without merit…
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 Townsend V. Sain Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Robert W. Duckett appeals from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. That court accepted the detailed findings of fact made by a state j'udge after a two-day hearing in a state post-conviction proceeding. The petitioner’s claim that the prosecuting attorney had knowingly used perjured testimony was carefully considered in the state proceeding at which petitioner was represented by counsel and called a numher of witnesses. The claim was found to be without merit.
We agree with the District Court’s holding that the state post-conviction proceeding clearly met the tests set out in Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S. Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed.2d 770 (1963). The petitioner received a full and fair evidentiary hearing on the same issue now being asserted in the federal courts, and his claim of perjured testimony was shown to be without substance. Under the circumstances a federal hearing is unnecessary because “the state-court trier of fact has after a full hearing reliably found the relevant facts.” 372 U.S. at 312, 83 S.Ct. at 757.
Accordingly, no certificate of probable cause will issue and the docketed appeal will be dismissed as frivolous. Burgess v. Warden, 4 Cir., 284 F. 2d 486 (1960). .
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Bithoney, 486 F.2d 319 (1st Cir. 1973)
-
Blair v. Shenandoah Women's Ctr., Inc., 757 F.2d 1435 (4th Cir. 1985)
-
DOE v. DOE, 660 F.2d 101 (4th Cir. 1981)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (U.S. 1963)
- Earlie Burgess v. Warden, Maryland House of Correction, 284 F.2d 486 (4th Cir. 1960)