PORET ET AL.
v.
SIGLER, WARDEN
PORET ET AL.
SIGLER, WARDEN
355 U.S. 60
Supreme Court of the United States (1957)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and in view of the action of the Supreme Court of Louisiana on September 25, 1957, in Poret v. Sigler and Poret v. Louisiana, Nos. 269 and 270, Misc., O. T. 1957, certiorari denied this day [post, p. 879], the judgments heretofore entered are vacated, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for consideration of the application for habeas corpus. The stay heretofore entered is continued in effect until final disposition of the case in the District Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
FAY v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (U.S. 1963)…a proper record. Bullock v. South Carolina, 365 U. S. 292. And so in a number of cases the Court has apparently excused compliance with the requirement. See, e. g., Weston v. Sigler, 361 U. S. 37; Bailey v. Arkansas, 358 U. S. 869; Poret v. Sigler, 355 U. S. 60; Massey v. Moore, 348 U. S. 105. Cf. Thomas v. Arizona, 356 U. S. 390, 392, n. 1. The same practice has sometimes been followed in the Federal District Courts. See Reitz, Federal Habeas Corpus: Postconviction Remedy for State Prisoners, 108 U. of Pa…
-
Labat v. Bennett, 365 F.2d 698 (5th Cir. 1966)…on of Negroes from the petit jury by which they were tried.” The Supreme Court denied the writs but remanded the cause to the district court for consideration in view of the petitioners’ having exhausted their state remedies. Poret v. Sigler, 1958, 355 U.S. 60, 78 S.Ct. 144, 2 L.Ed.2d 107. After “in effect, retr[ying] the petitioners for the offense of which they have been convicted”, the district court discharged the writ. Labat v. Sigler, E.D. La.1958, 162 F.Supp. 574. The district judge did not consid…