HARRIS

v.

RHAY, PENITENTIARY SUPERINTENDENT

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Combs, 634 F.2d 1295 (10th Cir. 1980)
  …under this section for the same act or acts.” The court decided the issue on the basis of statutory interpretation, not double jeopardy analysis. 214 F. 2d [*1303] at 809; see Riadon v. United States, 274 F. 2d 804, 305-06 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 896, 81 S.Ct. 225, 5 L.Ed.2d 189 (1960). The only double jeopardy discussion in the opinion was as follows: There is double jeopardy language in the appellant’s brief. If, by that language, it is intended to raise a constitutional argument, no more nee…
• United States v. Hairrell, 521 F.2d 1264 (6th Cir. 1975)
  …s proof of facts not required by the other the cases do not involve the same offense and the second prosecution does not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. Riadon v. United States, 274 F. 2d 304 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 896, 81 S.Ct. 225, 5 L.Ed.2d 189 (1960); United States v. Carlton, 475 F. 2d 104 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 842, 94 S.Ct. 100, 38 L.Ed.2d 80 (1973). Defendant was convicted of possessing counterfeit currency at a different time and place in th…
• United States v. Mitchell, 427 F.2d 1280 (3d Cir. 1970)
  …ecision was induced by coercion or [*1282] promises, Dranow v. United States, 325 F. 2d 481, 483-485 (8 Cir. 1963), or that he did not appreciate the gravity of the offense charged, Riadon v. United States, 274 F. 2d 304, 307 (6 Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 896, 81 S.Ct. 225, 5 L.Ed.2d 189 (1960). Just as in United States v. Hunt, 413 F. 2d 983 (4 Cir. 1969), where the defendants acknowledged in signing a waiver that they had been “informed of their rights,” appellant’s waiver form specifically stated that…