Winkel v. Matthews
Winkel v. Matthews
214 F.2d 281; 94 U.S. App. D.C. 216; 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2689
(Federal Reporter, Second Series)
Winkel v. Matthews
Opinion
This appeal is from an order discharging a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant is in custody under an extradition order. He contends he was held an unreasonably long time on a mere detainer before the requisition from Ohio, the demanding State, was received. The record does not clearly establish this contention. In any event the contention does not appear to have been made in the District Court, Certainly it was not made during the time when appellant was — allegedly—unreasonably held. We find no error affect-inS substantial rights,
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.