Geary L. Dandridge v. Charles Black, Warden, Nebraska State Penitentiary

785 F.2d 649, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22962
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 13, 1986
Docket85-1832
StatusPublished

This text of 785 F.2d 649 (Geary L. Dandridge v. Charles Black, Warden, Nebraska State Penitentiary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Geary L. Dandridge v. Charles Black, Warden, Nebraska State Penitentiary, 785 F.2d 649, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22962 (8th Cir. 1986).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Geary L. Dandridge appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of robbery and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony as well as being an habitual criminal. He was sentenced to consecutive prison terms of ten years on each count. His conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court. See State v. Dandridge, 209 Neb. 885, 312 N.W.2d 286 (1981).

In his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, appellant asserted that he was denied due process by a variety of alleged trial errors as well as the prosecutor’s failure to disclose certain allegedly exculpatory discovery material. Appellant also challenged his sentence as excessive and as in violation of Nebraska law.

The district court referred the matter to a United States magistrate who thoroughly reviewed all of appellant’s claims. The district court approved and adopted the magistrate’s report and recommendation, con- *650 eluding de novo that appellant’s claims were without constitutional merit.

We have carefully studied the record, including the magistrate’s and district court’s opinions and the parties’ briefs and arguments. We find that the judgment of the district court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the district court’s opinion. See 8TH CIR.R. 14.

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

Related

State v. Dandridge
312 N.W.2d 286 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
785 F.2d 649, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geary-l-dandridge-v-charles-black-warden-nebraska-state-penitentiary-ca8-1986.