Mott v. Dail

337 F. Supp. 731, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15397
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 26, 1972
DocketCiv. 2729
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 337 F. Supp. 731 (Mott v. Dail) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mott v. Dail, 337 F. Supp. 731, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15397 (E.D.N.C. 1972).

Opinion

ORDER

BUTLER, Chief Judge.

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed in forma pauperis an application for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner was convicted upon his plea of guilty to the charge of involuntary manslaughter at the June 26, 1970, Session of Cumberland County Superior Court, and received a sentence of not less than four nor more than five years.

His sole contention in this court is that he is entitled to credit on his sentence for time spent in custody prior to trial.

Petitioner has not presented his claim to the state courts, but it is clear from the recent North Carolina decisions in State v. Virgil, 276 N.C. 217, *732 172 S.E.2d 28 (1970), and State v. Walker, 7 N.C.App. 548, 172 S.E.2d 881 (1970) that current North Carolina case law makes state proceedings ineffective. Therefore, petitioner will not be required to pursue his claim in the state courts.

The decision in this case is governed by the rationale in Cole v. North Carolina, 419 F.2d 127 (4th Cir. 1969). In that case Cole sought credit for time spent in custody pending appeal. Under the provisions of North Carolina General Statute § 15-186.1 a person tried after ratification of the statute is entitled to credit for time spent in custody pending appeal. Cole was tried prior to the enactment of the statute. However, the State of North Carolina conceded and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that when the statute was made prospective only an unlawful discrimination arose against persons tried prior to the ratification of the statute. The court ordered that credit be given.

The situation in the instant case is analogous to Cole. North Carolina General Statute § 15-176.2, ratified July 19, 1971, allows credit for time spent in custody prior to trial. The statute applies only to cases tried after the date of ratification. Petitioner was tried prior to enactment of the statute. Applying the reasoning underlying Cole, it is clear that petitioner is being subjected to an invidious discrimination and that he is entitled to credit for all time spent in custody prior to trial. See, Withers v. North Carolina, No. 71-1111 (4th Cir. Oct. 20, 1971). Now, therefore,

It is ordered that petitioner be given full credit for time spent in custody before commitment and that the State of North Carolina file in the office of the Clerk of this court in Raleigh, North Carolina, within 30 days from date of service of this order, a statement certifying whether or not said State has provided petitioner with credit on his sentence in accordance with this order, and the State shall serve a copy of said statement by mail upon the petitioner.

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

Related

Godbold v. Wilson
518 F. Supp. 1265 (D. Colorado, 1981)
Hallowell v. Keve
412 F. Supp. 681 (D. Delaware, 1976)
Anglin v. State
525 P.2d 34 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1974)
In Re Kapperman
522 P.2d 657 (California Supreme Court, 1974)
State v. Sutton
521 P.2d 1008 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1974)
Mohr v. Jordan
370 F. Supp. 1149 (D. Maryland, 1974)
Gillis v. Swenson
495 S.W.2d 658 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1973)
In Re Young
32 Cal. App. 3d 68 (California Court of Appeal, 1973)
Mott v. Dail
473 F.2d 908 (Fourth Circuit, 1973)
White v. Gilligan
351 F. Supp. 1012 (S.D. Ohio, 1972)
Steele v. State of North Carolina
348 F. Supp. 1023 (W.D. North Carolina, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
337 F. Supp. 731, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mott-v-dail-nced-1972.