Norman B. Gorham v. Elliot L. Richardson, Attorney General of the United States
Opinion
In his petition for habeas corpus, Gor-ham alleges that the parole board deprived him of fundamental fairness and abused its discretion when it refused to grant him parole. As this Court, sitting en banc, has recently stated, “[i]n the absence of evidence of flagrant, unwarranted, or unauthorized action by the Board, it is not the function of the courts to review such proceedings.” Scarpa v. U. S. Board of Parole (en banc), 5 Cir., 1973, 477 F.2d 278, 283. [Footnote omitted.] The record in the instant case reveals no evidence which would entitle Gorham to relief.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Norman B. GORHAM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Elliot L. RICHARDSON, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent-Appellee
- Cited By
- 6 cases
- Status
- Published