Earnest Galloway v. Attorney General

Fifth Circuit

Earnest Galloway v. Attorney General

451 F.2d 357, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6982

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 22, 1971

Docket71-2795

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 451 F.2d 357 (Earnest Galloway v. Attorney General) 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

Earnest Galloway v. Attorney General, 451 F.2d 357, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6982 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant is presently serving a sentence for conviction of a federal offense allegedly committed while he was on parole from a prior federal sentence. He has sought relief from the parole violator’s warrant which the Parole Board intends to execute upon expiration of his present sentence.

Appellant contended that it is improper for the Parole Board to delay his revocation hearing until expiration of the later sentence. As the district court held, there is clearly no merit to this contention. Cox v. Feld-Kamp, 5th Cir. 1971, 438 F.2d 1, and cases there cited.

In his reply brief, the appellant alleges that the parole violator’s warrant actually was executed on April 1, 1971, without according him the hearing required by 18 U.S.C. § 4207. We note that this allegation is refuted by an affidavit of a prison official, which is in the record. This affidavit, sworn to on May 14, 1971, states that the appellant “will be afforded a revocation hearing before the first Parole Board meeting after the warrant has been executed.” (Emphasis supplied.) We pretermit decision of this point, however, since it never has been presented to the district court for ruling. Hemming v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 11, 12.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The appellant is presently serving a sentence for conviction of a federal offense allegedly committed while he was on parole from a prior federal sentence. He has sought relief from the parole violator’s warrant which the Parole Board intends to execute upon expiration of his present sentence.

Appellant contended that it is improper for the Parole Board to delay his revocation hearing until expiration of the later sentence. As the district court held, there is clearly no merit to this contention. Cox v. Feld-Kamp, 5th Cir. 1971, 438 F.2d 1, and cases there cited.

In his reply brief, the appellant alleges that the parole violator’s warrant actually was executed on April 1, 1971, without according him the hearing required by 18 U.S.C. § 4207. We note that this allegation is refuted by an affidavit of a prison official, which is in the record. This affidavit, sworn to on May 14, 1971, states that the appellant “will be afforded a revocation hearing before the first Parole Board meeting after the warrant has been executed.” (Emphasis supplied.) We pretermit decision of this point, however, since it never has been presented to the district court for ruling. Hemming v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 11, 12.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

451 F.2d 357, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/earnest-galloway-v-attorney-general-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack