WILLIAM B. CAMPBELL, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF GEORGIA AND ROBERT GRADY, RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES
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 the search warrant affidavit was legally sufficient and the resulting seizure was valid, agreeing with the district court's findings.
Appellant, a prisoner, challenged the denial of habeas corpus relief. The core issues involved the validity of a search warrant and the seizure of goo…
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 Search Warrant Validity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This appeal by a prisoner of the State of Georgia is from the denial of habeas corpus relief in the district court. The pertinent facts will be found in the decision rendered by the Supreme Court of Georgia in connection with appellant’s state court appeal. Campbell v. State, 226 Ga. 883, 178 S.E. 2d 257 (1970), cert. den. sub nom. Campbell v. Georgia, 401 U.S. 1002, 91 S.Ct. 1246, 28 L.Ed.2d 535 (1971). The district court also filed full opinion in denying the relief sought.
The questions presented here were among those decided on the state appeal. They concern the validity of a search warrant and the resulting seizure of goods which were introduced in evidence in the Georgia prosecution of appellant for receiving stolen goods. Both questions received extensive consideration on a motion to suppress in the state trial court.
The district court found the affidavit underlying the search warrant to be legally sufficient and thus that the warrant was valid. The seizure was also found to be valid. We agree as to both issues.
It was also proper for the district court to require exhaustion of state remedies on the issue presented as to the mode and conditions of appellant’s confinement, the type of confinement having been tailored to appellant’s severe physical incapacity.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Osborn v. Rundle, 401 U.S. 1002 (U.S. 1971)
- Yoder v. United States, 401 U.S. 1002 (U.S. 1971)