Paul Albert Patterson v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Paul Albert Patterson v. United States

487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10610

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 11, 1974

Docket73-2089

StatusPublished

This text of 487 F.2d 1300 (Paul Albert Patterson v. United States) 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

Paul Albert Patterson v. United States, 487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10610 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

After petitioner, Paul Albert Patterson, served his time and paid his fine for his 1963 federal conviction based on an indictment charging him with depositing in the mails a letter containing obscene, lewd, lascivious and indecent photographs, he applied for a writ in-the. nature of coram nobis to the District Court. The District Judge denied relief.

We have found the recent Supreme Court cases do not mandate a different result. Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973).; Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49, 93 S.Ct. 2628, 37 L.Ed.2d 446 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139, 93 S.Ct. 2674, 37 L.Ed.2d 513 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115, 93 S.Ct. 2680, 37 L.Ed.2d 492 (1973); United States v. 12 200 Ft. Reels of Super 8mm Film, 413 U.S. 123, 93 S.Ct. 2665, 37 L.Ed.2d 500 (1973).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

After petitioner, Paul Albert Patterson, served his time and paid his fine for his 1963 federal conviction based on an indictment charging him with depositing in the mails a letter containing obscene, lewd, lascivious and indecent photographs, he applied for a writ in-the. nature of coram nobis to the District Court. The District Judge denied relief.

We have found the recent Supreme Court cases do not mandate a different result. Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973).; Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49, 93 S.Ct. 2628, 37 L.Ed.2d 446 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139, 93 S.Ct. 2674, 37 L.Ed.2d 513 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115, 93 S.Ct. 2680, 37 L.Ed.2d 492 (1973); United States v. 12 200 Ft. Reels of Super 8mm Film, 413 U.S. 123, 93 S.Ct. 2665, 37 L.Ed.2d 500 (1973).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

487 F.2d 1300, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-albert-patterson-v-united-states-ca5-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack