Samuel Ed Robinson v. C. Murray Henderson

Sixth Circuit

Samuel Ed Robinson v. C. Murray Henderson

391 F.2d 933, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7371

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedApril 10, 1968

Docket18121_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 391 F.2d 933 (Samuel Ed Robinson v. C. Murray Henderson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Samuel Ed Robinson v. C. Murray Henderson, 391 F.2d 933, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7371 (6th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER.

Appellant was convicted in the State Criminal Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee, under a three-count indictment charging assault with the intent to commit murder. He is now serving his sentence in the Tennessee State Penitentiary. Earlier he had been convicted in the City Court; at Chattanooga, Tennessee, of three offenses of assault and battery and was fined $50 for each offense. The convictions in the State Court and City Court arose out of the same occurrences.

This habeas corpus action is based on the contention that the conviction in the State Court constituted double jeopardy and violated constitutional rights of appellant under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. This appeal is from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Southern Division, denying the application for writ of habeas corpus.

Upon consideration, it is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be and hereby is affirmed upon the opinion of District Judge Frank W. Wilson, reported at 268 F.Supp. 349.

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

ORDER.

Appellant was convicted in the State Criminal Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee, under a three-count indictment charging assault with the intent to commit murder. He is now serving his sentence in the Tennessee State Penitentiary. Earlier he had been convicted in the City Court; at Chattanooga, Tennessee, of three offenses of assault and battery and was fined $50 for each offense. The convictions in the State Court and City Court arose out of the same occurrences.

This habeas corpus action is based on the contention that the conviction in the State Court constituted double jeopardy and violated constitutional rights of appellant under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. This appeal is from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Southern Division, denying the application for writ of habeas corpus.

Upon consideration, it is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be and hereby is affirmed upon the opinion of District Judge Frank W. Wilson, reported at 268 F.Supp. 349.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 F.2d 933, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-ed-robinson-v-c-murray-henderson-ca6-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack