Don Victor Harbolt, Jr. v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden

432 F.2d 441
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided October 22, 1970·No. 295-70·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon docketing, this case was assigned to the summary calendar in view of the unsubstantial questions involved and Harbolt was given an opportunity to address the underlying merits and oppose summary action, which he has done.

A thorough review of the files and records in this case, along with the papers submitted by Harbolt, convinces us that the judgment of the district court is correct and that there is no necessity for further argument.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated in 311 F.Supp. 688 (W.D.Okl. 1970).

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

Don Victor Harbolt, Jr. v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden, 432 F.2d 441 (10th Cir. 1970).

432 F.2d 441 (Don Victor Harbolt, Jr. v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kermicle v. Day
428 F. Supp. 16 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1976)
Douglas v. U. S. Attorney General
404 F. Supp. 1314 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1975)
United States v. Steel
400 F. Supp. 39 (E.D. Oklahoma, 1975)
Rojelio E. Rivera v. E. O. Toft, Warden
477 F.2d 534 (Tenth Circuit, 1973)