Mike Ortiz v. Harold A. Cox, Warden, New Mexico State Penitentiary

Tenth Circuit

Mike Ortiz v. Harold A. Cox, Warden, New Mexico State Penitentiary

338 F.2d 1017

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedDecember 8, 1964

Docket7849

StatusPublished

This text of 338 F.2d 1017 (Mike Ortiz v. Harold A. Cox, Warden, New Mexico State Penitentiary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mike Ortiz v. Harold A. Cox, Warden, New Mexico State Penitentiary, 338 F.2d 1017 (10th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a sucessive application to the New Mexico Federal Court attacking the validity of the petitioner’s State sentence. The trial Court allowed the petitioner to proceed in forma pauperis and upon examining the petition and the records of the Court, particularly the record in cause No. 4046, found that this petition raised no new grounds for relief not presented and adversely decided against the petitioner in cause No. 4046, entitled Ortis v. Woodruff.

The case was brought here on probable cause, and counsel was appointed to represent the petitioner. Upon consideration of the record and oral argument of counsel, the judgment of the trial Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a sucessive application to the New Mexico Federal Court attacking the validity of the petitioner’s State sentence. The trial Court allowed the petitioner to proceed in forma pauperis and upon examining the petition and the records of the Court, particularly the record in cause No. 4046, found that this petition raised no new grounds for relief not presented and adversely decided against the petitioner in cause No. 4046, entitled Ortis v. Woodruff.

The case was brought here on probable cause, and counsel was appointed to represent the petitioner. Upon consideration of the record and oral argument of counsel, the judgment of the trial Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

338 F.2d 1017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mike-ortiz-v-harold-a-cox-warden-new-mexico-state-penitentiary-ca10-1964.