McGee v. Henderson

Fifth Circuit

McGee v. Henderson

514 F.2d 1234

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1975

DocketNo. 74 — 4045

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 514 F.2d 1234 (McGee v. Henderson) 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

McGee v. Henderson, 514 F.2d 1234 (5th Cir. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The district court denied the habeas corpus petition of McGee, a state prisoner, without an evidentiary hearing. Giving this pro se application the liberal construction which is required by Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 [1235]*1235L.Ed.2d 652 (1972), it appears that the appellant claims he was denied the right to appeal. Without any intimation as to the merits of the case, it is our conclusion that the judgment of the district court denying the petition should be vacated and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing. At the evidentiary hearing, the appellant’s proof must meet the standards set forth in Worts v. Dut-ton, 395 F.2d 341 (5th Cir. 1968) and Fitzgerald v. Estelle, 505 F.2d 1334 (5th Cir. 1974).

Vacated and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM:

The district court denied the habeas corpus petition of McGee, a state prisoner, without an evidentiary hearing. Giving this pro se application the liberal construction which is required by Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 [1235]*1235L.Ed.2d 652 (1972), it appears that the appellant claims he was denied the right to appeal. Without any intimation as to the merits of the case, it is our conclusion that the judgment of the district court denying the petition should be vacated and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing. At the evidentiary hearing, the appellant’s proof must meet the standards set forth in Worts v. Dut-ton, 395 F.2d 341 (5th Cir. 1968) and Fitzgerald v. Estelle, 505 F.2d 1334 (5th Cir. 1974).

Vacated and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

514 F.2d 1234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgee-v-henderson-ca5-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack