DELAGE LARRY SMITH, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1969-12-23
No. 28337
420 F.2d 488 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1969) Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the appellant's earned good time should not have been revoked and that he should not receive credit for time spent in prison on a Mississippi conviction.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant, a federal convict, sought habeas corpus relief after his parole was revoked and good time was revoked. He had a prior federal conviction an…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from the order of the district court denying the petition of a federal convict for the writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.1

Appellant is currently serving a 15-year sentence imposed upon a plea of guilty on February 6, 1959 to a charge of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), entering a bank with intent to commit a felony. While serving this sentence the state of Mississippi lodged a detainer against him. Upon being paroled on April 13, 1964, appellant was taken into custody by Mississippi officers and was thereupon tried and convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment. His state sentence expired and he was released on December 31, 1966. On August 22, 1967, appellant was arrested on a parole violator warrant for leaving the district without permission. He was returned to the federal penitentiary to serve the remainder of his sentence, and all earned good time was revoked.

Appellant contends that his earned good time should not have been revoked. This contention is without merit. See Smith v. Blackwell, 5 Cir., 1966, 367 F. 2d 539, 541.

He also contends that he should be given credit against his sentence for the time spent in prison on the Mississippi conviction. This is also without merit. See Van Horn v. Maguire, 5 Cir., 1964, 328 F. 2d 585.

Affirmed.

. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F. 2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5th Cir. 1969, 417 F. 2d 526, Part I.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw