Dinkins v. Wainwright

Fifth Circuit

Dinkins v. Wainwright

451 F.2d 587

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 29, 1971

DocketNo. 71-2717

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 451 F.2d 587 (Dinkins v. Wainwright) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dinkins v. Wainwright, 451 F.2d 587 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Alvin Dinkins, also known as Alvin Thomas, was convicted by a jury in the Criminal Court of Record in Orange County, Florida, of the offense of robbery. The conviction was affirmed, per curiam, 223 So.2d 577 (Fla.App.1969).

Dinkins then sought relief by way of habeas corpus. The contention was that petitioner had been denied a fair trial, i. e., due process, because the state trial court admitted evidence, with proper precautionary instructions, of other robberies allegedly committed by the defendant near the same date as that of the alleged offense.

The United States District Court reviewed the transcript of the state court trial and held that the alleged evidentiary errors did not rise to constitutional proportions (unpublished opinion dated July 22,1971). We agree.

The judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Alvin Dinkins, also known as Alvin Thomas, was convicted by a jury in the Criminal Court of Record in Orange County, Florida, of the offense of robbery. The conviction was affirmed, per curiam, 223 So.2d 577 (Fla.App.1969).

Dinkins then sought relief by way of habeas corpus. The contention was that petitioner had been denied a fair trial, i. e., due process, because the state trial court admitted evidence, with proper precautionary instructions, of other robberies allegedly committed by the defendant near the same date as that of the alleged offense.

The United States District Court reviewed the transcript of the state court trial and held that the alleged evidentiary errors did not rise to constitutional proportions (unpublished opinion dated July 22,1971). We agree.

The judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

451 F.2d 587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dinkins-v-wainwright-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack