Russell Alexander v. C. Murray Henderson, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary

Fifth Circuit

Russell Alexander v. C. Murray Henderson, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary

459 F.2d 1391

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 29, 1972

Docket71-3149

StatusPublished

This text of 459 F.2d 1391 (Russell Alexander v. C. Murray Henderson, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary) 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

Russell Alexander v. C. Murray Henderson, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, 459 F.2d 1391 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the denial of a habeas petition by a state prisoner. The petitioner, Russell Alexander, was convicted by a Louisiana jury of murder and sentenced to death. In his habeas petition Alexander asserts (1) that his conviction was based on an involuntary confession which was admitted into evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and (2) that the death sentence was returned by a “hanging” jury in violation of Witherspoon v. Illinois, 1968, 391 U.S. 510, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776. We conclude that on the basis of the reasons and reasoning carefully delineated in the opinion of the district judge, Alexander v. Henderson, W.D.La. 1971, 330 F.Supp. 812, the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the denial of a habeas petition by a state prisoner. The petitioner, Russell Alexander, was convicted by a Louisiana jury of murder and sentenced to death. In his habeas petition Alexander asserts (1) that his conviction was based on an involuntary confession which was admitted into evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and (2) that the death sentence was returned by a “hanging” jury in violation of Witherspoon v. Illinois, 1968, 391 U.S. 510, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776. We conclude that on the basis of the reasons and reasoning carefully delineated in the opinion of the district judge, Alexander v. Henderson, W.D.La. 1971, 330 F.Supp. 812, the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

459 F.2d 1391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-alexander-v-c-murray-henderson-warden-louisiana-state-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack