LaPlume v. Mullen

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

LaPlume v. Mullen

316 A.2d 349, 112 R.I. 947, 1974 R.I. LEXIS 1572

Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided March 14, 1974·No. M. P. No. 74-53·Published

Opinion

Respondent directed to file his answer to the petition [948]*948for writ of habeas corpus 'and'therein to show cause, if any, why the writ should not issue as.prayed and why petitioner should not be admitted to bail, said answer to. be made in compliance with the provisions of Rule. 14. The stay of the Superior Court order entered on March 1, 1974 shall continue in effect until further order of court.

Lynch, Walsh & Cobleigh, John D. Lynch, for petitioner. Richard J. Israel, Attorney. General, for respondent. Roberts, Q. J. not participating.

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

Respondent directed to file his answer to the petition [948]*948for writ of habeas corpus 'and'therein to show cause, if any, why the writ should not issue as.prayed and why petitioner should not be admitted to bail, said answer to. be made in compliance with the provisions of Rule. 14. The stay of the Superior Court order entered on March 1, 1974 shall continue in effect until further order of court.

Lynch, Walsh & Cobleigh, John D. Lynch, for petitioner. Richard J. Israel, Attorney. General, for respondent. Roberts, Q. J. not participating.

LaPlume v. Mullen, 316 A.2d 349, 112 R.I. 947, 1974 R.I. LEXIS 1572 (R.I. 1974).

Pincite

316 A.2d 349 (LaPlume v. Mullen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.