JOHN HENRY LEE, JR., #028436, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLA., RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1973-12-06
No. 73-2280
488 F.2d 140 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1973)

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 state prisoner's contentions regarding illegal seizure and interrogation without Miranda warnings were without merit.


Facts & Procedural History

A state prisoner appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, arguing evidence was seized incident to an illegal arrest and he was interrogated …

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:

Appellant Lee, a state prisoner, appeals from an order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He contends that evidence introduced at his trial was seized incident to an illegal arrest and that he was interrogated without prior Miranda warnings.

Upon a complete review of the record we find that appellant’s contentions are without merit. His initial detention was proper because it was based upon specific facts known to the police officer. Between 4:00 and 5:00 o’clock in the morning the officer was searching a residential neighborhood for a black rape suspect driving a Ford. Appellant was a black male driving a Ford in the neighborhood at that time. Probable cause for an arrest, of course, was not needed to momentarily detain the appellant in the course of the officer’s investigation.1 Subsequently obtained information made an arrest justifiable under the probable cause standard.

We find the Miranda issue is primarily factual. The material facts were fully developed at a state court hearing on a motion to suppress, and the state’s factual determination was fairly supported by the record. There is no allegation of newly discovered evidence. The district court properly made an independent examination of the file and state court record as well as considering a magistrate’s report and recommendation.

Upon the authority of Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed. 2d 770 (1963), this petition was properly dismissed.

Affirmed.

. See, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), and United States v. Moreno, 475 F. 2d 44 (5th Cir. 1973).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw