EDWARD GRIGGS, JR., PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT, ANCHORAGE STATE JAIL, AND STATE OF ALASKA, 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 district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on a habeas corpus petition challenging extradition.
Griggs sought a writ of habeas corpus to prevent extradition, alleging a six-month delay denied him due process. The state court hearing did not dispu…
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 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D)(3) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM :
Griggs appeals from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus which he sought to prevent his extradition from Alaska to California. The sole issue is whether the district court erred in dismissing the petition without an evidentiary hearing in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(3).
Griggs alleged in his petition that a six-month delay in extradition denied him due process of law, and now contends that the state court hearing did not adequately develop the facts material to this issue. However, the facts at the state court hearing were not in dispute, and Griggs did not allege any additional facts in his federal petition indicating that he was prejudiced by the delay. Cf. United States v. Marion, 1971, 404 U.S. 307, 325-326. In such circumstances, the district court was justified in concluding that an evidentiary hearing would serve no purpose. Rainsberger v. Fogliani, 9 Cir., 380 F. 2d 783, 785.
Moreover, Griggs’ counsel, in the state proceeding, specifically agreed to the state court’s factual findings and declined an opportunity to request additional findings. See Townsend v. Sain, 1963, 372 U.S. 293, 317, 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed. 770.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Morris v. Wyrick, 516 F.2d 1387 (8th Cir. 1975)
-
Tamayo-Reyes v. J.C. Keeney, 926 F.2d 1492 (9th Cir. 1991)
Authorities Cited
- Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (U.S. 1963)
- United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1971)
- Rainsberger v. Fogliani, 380 F.2d 783 (9th Cir. 1967)