U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1942

Wright v. Brady

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided June 30, 1942 · Dobie, Northcott, Parker

129 F.2d 109; 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 3308 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

J. Y. Jordan, Jr., of Asheville, N. C., for appellant., Robert E. Clapp, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen. of State of Maryland (William C. Walsh, Atty. Gen. of State of Maryland, and J. Bernard Wells, State’s Atty., and Paul Wolman and Anselm Sodaro, Asst. State’s Attys., all of Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Johnson v. Walker (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1961)
Mason McCoy v. E. H. Tucker, Warden, West Virginia State Penitentiary (4th Cir. 1958)
Curran v. Shuttleworth, Warden (6th Cir. 1950)
In re Burson (Ohio Ct. App. 1948)
Edmondson v. Brady (Md. 1947)
Degrange v. Wright (Md. 1947)
Bernard v. Brady (4th Cir. 1947)
Bernard v. Warden of Maryland House of Correction (Md. 1946)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Defendant was convicted in a state court of the crime of burglary and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. He complains that the court did not appoint' counsel to defend him, that certain evidence was improperly admitted on the trial and that the evidence was not sufficien! *110for his conviction. It is clear that the failure of the state court to appoint counsel did not amount to a denial of due process or oust the court’s jurisdiction so as to warrant the release of the prisoner on habeas corpus. Betts v. Brady, 62 S.Ct. 1252, 86 L.Ed. -. And certainly the federal court could not review on habeas corpus errors of the state court in the admission or rejection of testimony or the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction. Woolsey v. Best, 299 U.S. 1, 57 S.Ct. 2, 81 L.Ed. 3; Glasgow v. Moyer, 225 U.S. 420, 32 S.Ct. 753, 56 L.Ed. 1147; Charlton v. Kelly, 229 U.S. 447, 33 S.Ct. 945, 57 L.Ed. 1274, 46 L.R.A.,N.S., 397. The order denying the writ of habeas corpus will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.