Patrick J. O'Shea v. United States of America

First Circuit

Patrick J. O'Shea v. United States of America

395 F.2d 754, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6651

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedJune 5, 1968

Docket7088

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 395 F.2d 754 (Patrick J. O'Shea v. United States of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Patrick J. O'Shea v. United States of America, 395 F.2d 754, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6651 (1st Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner O’Shea seeks a writ of habeas corpus directed against the United States Marshal, * alleging wrongful custody under the following circumstances. While O’Shea was in state confinement in the state of New York a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum was issued by the District Court for the District of Massachusetts and he was brought thereunder to Massachusetts to stand trial in the district court under an indictment. He was tried and convicted and his appeal is presently under advisement. While in custody after sentence he filed the present petition. The district court dismissed, and O’Shea appeals.

The issues, somewhat elaborately argued, can be simply disposed of. In the first place, the presentence custody was not open to attack. Carbo v. United States, 1961, 364 U.S. 611, 81 S.Ct. 338, 5 L.Ed.2d 329. But even if such prior custody had been illegal, custody became valid under the sentence. Frisbie v. Collins, 1952, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541.

Affirmed.

*

The writ is also sought against the Warden of a Massachusetts jail in which petitioner, at the time of filing the petition, was being lodged by the Marshal. Custody is in the Marshal, and the Warden was improperly named.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner O’Shea seeks a writ of habeas corpus directed against the United States Marshal, * alleging wrongful custody under the following circumstances. While O’Shea was in state confinement in the state of New York a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum was issued by the District Court for the District of Massachusetts and he was brought thereunder to Massachusetts to stand trial in the district court under an indictment. He was tried and convicted and his appeal is presently under advisement. While in custody after sentence he filed the present petition. The district court dismissed, and O’Shea appeals.

The issues, somewhat elaborately argued, can be simply disposed of. In the first place, the presentence custody was not open to attack. Carbo v. United States, 1961, 364 U.S. 611, 81 S.Ct. 338, 5 L.Ed.2d 329. But even if such prior custody had been illegal, custody became valid under the sentence. Frisbie v. Collins, 1952, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541.

Affirmed.

*

The writ is also sought against the Warden of a Massachusetts jail in which petitioner, at the time of filing the petition, was being lodged by the Marshal. Custody is in the Marshal, and the Warden was improperly named.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

395 F.2d 754, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-j-oshea-v-united-states-of-america-ca1-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack