George Paul Cook v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

George Paul Cook v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

402 F.2d 294

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 28, 1968

Docket25926

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 402 F.2d 294 (George Paul Cook v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida) 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

George Paul Cook v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 402 F.2d 294 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant-petitioner, a Florida state prisoner released on a conditional pardon under supervision for life, sought habeas corpus relief on the grounds that the state suppressed evidence on his trial material to his defense and also knowingly used perjured testimony. The district court, after a comprehensive evidentiary hearing, concluded that petitioner’s proof fell short of the mark and denied relief.

The burden was on petitioner to establish his allegations by a preponderance of the evidence. Walker v. Johnston, 1941, 312 U.S. 275, 286, 61 S.Ct. 574, 85 L.Ed. 830; Williams v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1965, 354 F.2d 698, 704. Based on an examination of the evidence, we are of the firm view that the district court was correct. The relief was properly denied.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant-petitioner, a Florida state prisoner released on a conditional pardon under supervision for life, sought habeas corpus relief on the grounds that the state suppressed evidence on his trial material to his defense and also knowingly used perjured testimony. The district court, after a comprehensive evidentiary hearing, concluded that petitioner’s proof fell short of the mark and denied relief.

The burden was on petitioner to establish his allegations by a preponderance of the evidence. Walker v. Johnston, 1941, 312 U.S. 275, 286, 61 S.Ct. 574, 85 L.Ed. 830; Williams v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1965, 354 F.2d 698, 704. Based on an examination of the evidence, we are of the firm view that the district court was correct. The relief was properly denied.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

402 F.2d 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-paul-cook-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-corrections-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack