RULE

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Gaddy v. Michael, 519 F.2d 669 (4th Cir. 1975)
  …, these are not served upon the releasee immediately, but are instead held as a de-tainer against the prisoner while he is serving the sentence on the new conviction.” . See, Jefferson v. Willingham (10th Cir. 1966) 366 F. 2d 353, 354, cert. denied 385 U.S. 1018, 87 S.Ct. 744, 17 L.Ed.2d 554; Noorlander v. United States Attorney General (8th Cir. 1972) 465 F. 2d 1106 (over 14 months); Cook v. United States Attorney General, supra (approximately 5 years’ delay). . When the parole violation rests on an inter…
• Simon v. Moseley, 452 F.2d 306 (10th Cir. 1971)
  …tence. Incarceration in a state institution during the time the warrant remains unserved is such a ‘good reason’.” Robinson v. Willingham, 369 F. 2d 688, 689-690 (10th Cir.); see also Jefferson v. Willingham, 366 F. 2d 353 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1018, 87 S.Ct. 744, 17 L.Ed.2d 554; Wright v. Taylor, 294 F. 2d 592 (10th Cir.); and Taylor v. Simpson, 292 F. 2d 698 (10th Cir.). And where such good reason for delay in executing the warrant exists due to State custody, the parolee has no complaint t…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Betancourt, 427 F.2d 851 (5th Cir. 1970)
  …72, 24 L.Ed.2d 230. Betancourt, at the time of his apprehension, had not disembarked from the ship. We are therefore of the opinion that his situation is rationally similar to that of Rule v. United States, 5 Cir., 1966, 362 F. 2d 215, cert. denied 385 U.S. 1018, 87 S.Ct. 744, 17 L.Ed.2d 554, and Walden v. United States, 5 Cir., 1969, 417 F. 2d 698. We hold, therefore, that the plea of self incrimination is of no avail. See, also, the full statutory scheme, 26 U.S.C.A. § 4741 et seq. We commend court appoi…