Bishop v. Huff

Supreme Court of Georgia

Bishop v. Huff

166 S.E.2d 578, 225 Ga. 156, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 409

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 20, 1969

Docket25066

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 166 S.E.2d 578 (Bishop v. Huff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bishop v. Huff, 166 S.E.2d 578, 225 Ga. 156, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 409 (Ga. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

In this habeas corpus hearing to inquire into the restraint of a prisoner held for extradition after the issuance of the Governor’s warrant, upon the admission by stipulation that the warrants are regular on their face and the only issue is one of defense which counsel seeks to urge that the State of Alabama has denied the applicant a speedy trial in violation of certain constitutional inhibitions thereby causing him undue and oppressive incarceration and has impaired his ability to defend himself, the court did not err in remanding him to custody and refusing to go into the issue thus raised. See United States v. Ewell, 383 U. S. 116 (86 SC 773, 15 LE2d 627); Mullennix v. Balkcom, 213 Ga. 490 (99 SE2d 832); Brown v. Grimes, 214 Ga. 388 (104 SE2d 907); Hill v. Griffin, 224 Ga. 378 (162 SE2d 397).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

In this habeas corpus hearing to inquire into the restraint of a prisoner held for extradition after the issuance of the Governor’s warrant, upon the admission by stipulation that the warrants are regular on their face and the only issue is one of defense which counsel seeks to urge that the State of Alabama has denied the applicant a speedy trial in violation of certain constitutional inhibitions thereby causing him undue and oppressive incarceration and has impaired his ability to defend himself, the court did not err in remanding him to custody and refusing to go into the issue thus raised. See United States v. Ewell, 383 U. S. 116 (86 SC 773, 15 LE2d 627); Mullennix v. Balkcom, 213 Ga. 490 (99 SE2d 832); Brown v. Grimes, 214 Ga. 388 (104 SE2d 907); Hill v. Griffin, 224 Ga. 378 (162 SE2d 397).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 S.E.2d 578, 225 Ga. 156, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bishop-v-huff-ga-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack