Limmie West, III v. State of Louisiana
Cases that cite this one
76 later published cases cite this decision. The 22 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Gennero Galtieri v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, John Matera v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections (5th Cir. 1978)
- Lane v. United States (District Court, District of Columbia 2015)
- Marion Mason v. Charles Balcom, Superintendent, Montgomery Correctional Institution,respondent-Appellant (5th Cir. 1976)
- Louis D. Lamberti v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections (5th Cir. 1975)
- Robert L. Streetman v. James A. Lynaugh, Interim Director, Texas Department of Corrections (5th Cir. 1987)
- Willie Jasper Darden v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida (11th Cir. 1984)
- Oscar Brown Boykins, Jr. v. Louie L. Wainwright (11th Cir. 1984)
- Ronald Clark O'Bryan v. W.J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent (5th Cir. 1983)
- William Lee Thompson v. Louie L. Wainwright (11th Cir. 1983)
- Cuyler v. Sullivan (Supreme Court of the United States 1980)
- United States of America Ex Rel. Bruce Barksdale v. Frank Blackburn, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary (5th Cir. 1980)
- Frank Grace v. Fred Butterworth, Etc. (1st Cir. 1980)
- Jack Messelt v. State of Alabama (5th Cir. 1979)
- Wesley Trahan v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Dept. Of Corrections (5th Cir. 1977)
- Don v. Stinson v. State of Alabama (5th Cir. 1977)
- Gennero Galtieri v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, John Matera v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections (5th Cir. 1977)
- (HC) Collins v. On Habeas Corpus (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2025)
- (HC) Treon v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2025)
- (HC) Calloway, Jr. v. The People of the State of California (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2024)
- (HC) Flores v. The People (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2024)
- (HC)Patton v. Wasco State Prison (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2024)
- (HC) Riego v. Current or Acting Field Office Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2024)
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
Limmie WEST, III, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
STATE OF LOUISIANA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 72--1338.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
March 24, 1975.
Wm. J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen. of La., Baton Rouge, La., Jim Garrison, Dist. Atty., New Orleans, La., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Louise Korns, Shirley G. Wimberly, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., New Orleans, La., for defendant-appellant.
Limmie West, III, pro se.
George M. Leppert, New Orleans, La. (Court appointed), for plaintiff-appellee.
Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and RIVES, WISDOM, GEWIN, BELL, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, DYER, SIMPSON, MORGAN, CLARK, RONEY and GEE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
We took this case and Fitzgerald v. Estelle, 5 Cir. 1974, 505 F.2d 1334 en banc 'to resolve the constitutional standards which govern adjudication of claims of ineffectual assistance of privately retained counsel.' Id. at 1335.
Having explicated the standards in Fitzgerald, we vacate Part III and adhere to and affirm Parts I, II and IV of the panel opinion of this Court. West v. State of Louisiana, 5 Cir. 1973, 478 F.2d 1026.
The judgment of the district court is vacated and the case is remanded for reconsideration of the alleged ineffective assistance of privately retained counsel in the light of Fitzgerald.
RONEY, Circuit Judge (specially concurring):
I concur in the en banc vacation and remand of the district court's judgment for reconsideration in the light of Fitzgerald v. Estelle, 505 F.2d 1334 (5th Cir. 1974) (en banc). I do not concur in affirmance of Part II of the panel opinion, West v. Louisiana, 478 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir. 1973), which indicates that the district court may decide this case without an evidentiary hearing. As indicated in my dissent to the panel opinion, 478 F.2d at pp. 1035--1037, I would call for a full development of the facts and at the very least, a review of the state trial record by the district court. I doubt that the district court can give adequate reconsideration to this case under the Fitzgerald principles without an evidentiary hearing. I would not indicate otherwise by affirmance of Part II of the panel opinion. I agree with the en banc majority that Parts I and IV are correct as written in the panel opinion.
RIVES, Circuit Judge (concurring in part and dissenting in part):
I concur in the affirmance of Parts I, II and IV of the panel opinion, but respectfully dissent both from the vacation of Part III of the panel opinion and from the vacation of the judgment of the District Court.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.