U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1970

Linnus Harrison v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided May 4, 1970 · Brown, Morgan, Ingraham

424 F.2d 633 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Linnus Harrison, pro se., Morton J. Hanlon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, Fla., for respondent-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

21 later published cases cite this decision. The 18 that cite it most often are listed here.

Henry Deleiano Harris v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections (5th Cir. 1974)
Theriault v. Lamb (District Court, D. Nevada 1974)
Redd v. State of Louisiana ex rel. Henderson (5th Cir. 1973)
Troy C. Burroughs v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida (5th Cir. 1972)
Robert Winston McDonald v. Louie l.wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida (5th Cir. 1972)
Charles A. Porter v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida (5th Cir. 1971)
Donald Sutton v. Clarence Jones and Henry Wade (5th Cir. 1971)
Harris Percy Wynn v. Samuel L. Smith, Warden, Georgia State Prison, Reidsville, Ga. (5th Cir. 1971)
Herman Jackson, Jr. v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections (5th Cir. 1971)
Peter Simmons, J. v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, Florida (5th Cir. 1971)
Doll Holloway v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida (5th Cir. 1971)
Simon Johnson v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida (5th Cir. 1971)
Williams v. Henderson (District Court, W.D. Louisiana 1971)
Roulette v. Swenson (District Court, W.D. Missouri 1971)
Alex Ardister, Jr. v. S. Lamont Smith, Warden, Georgia State Prison, Reidsville, Georgia (5th Cir. 1970)
Alex Ardister, Jr. v. S. Lamont Smith, Warden, Georgia State Prison, Reidsville, Georgia (5th Cir. 1970)
Arthur Garrett v. The State of Texas (5th Cir. 1970)
Arthur Garrett v. The State of Texas (5th Cir. 1970)

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from an or-order of the district court denying for failure to exhaust state remedies, the petition of a Florida convict for the writ of habeas corpus. We affirm. 1

Appellant, represented by privately-retained counsel, was tried on an indictment charging second degree murder and convicted of manslaughter. He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

In his petition in the court below, appellant set out numerous allegations as grounds for habeas corpus relief. A review of the record reveals that appellant has failed to present to any state court the allegations of ineffective representation of defense counsel and of admission into evidence of coerced incriminating statements. Although appellant has exhausted his state remedies as to the other issues offered in his petition, rules of comity dictate that state remedies be exhausted as to all issues raised in a petition for habeas corpus to a federal court. 28 U.S.C. § 2254; Wheeler v. Beto, 5th Cir. 1969, 407 F.2d 816. The judgment below is affirmed.

Affirmed.

. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the ease on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5th Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526. Part I.

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