WILLIE BEN MCCRARY, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT-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 federal district court was not required to hold a second evidentiary hearing, and its findings were not clearly erroneous.
A state prisoner sought habeas corpus relief, alleging the prosecution knowingly used perjured testimony. The state court denied relief after an evide…
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 Perjured Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court denying the petition of a Florida state prisoner for the writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.
McCrary is serving a 25 year sentence for armed robbery, having been convicted upon trial by jury. No direct appeal was taken. A motion to vacate sentence filed in the state trial court pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 1.850, 33 F.S.A., was denied after an evidentiary hearing and affirmed on appeal. McCrary v. State, Fla.App.1969, 220 So. 2d 445.
The single issue before the court below was whether the prosecution knowingly used perjured testimony to obtain a conviction. McCrary alleged that the state prosecuting attorney promised Mc-Crary’s co-defendant a probated sentence and paid him five dollars to testify that McCrary participated in the crime. This same issue was the subject of the evidentiary hearing in the state court at which the prosecutor testified that he paid no money and made no promises to obtain the co-defendant’s testimony. Mc-Crary offered the testimony of the co-defendant in support of his allegations. The state court found no credible testimony to support McCrary’s allegations. The United States District Court found that McCrary was afforded a full and fair state hearing and adopted the state court’s findings as its own.
The District Court is not required to hold a second evidentiary hearing in these circumstances. Ryan v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1970, 424 F. 2d 198.
A review of the record, including the transcript of the state evidentiary hearing, reveals no clear error in the findings of the District Court. 28 U.S. C.A. § 2254. The judgment below is
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Coursey v. Beto, 455 F.2d 474 (5th Cir. 1972)
Authorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Ryan v. Louie L. Wainwright, 424 F.2d 198 (5th Cir. 1970)
- McCRARY v. State, 220 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)