Sarshik v. Sanford

Fifth Circuit

Sarshik v. Sanford

142 F.2d 676, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3482

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided May 17, 1944·No. 10897·Published·Cited by 23 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The complaint made is that petitioner is ill, and so treated as to aggravate his illness, and especially by preventing his endeavors to help himself in the courts by legal process. On the hearing it appeared that appellant had never been disciplined and was allowed to carry on a considerable correspondence with lawyers, and that there had been no interference with his seeking this writ of habeas corpus. The courts have no function to superintend the treatment of prisoners in the penitentiary, but only to deliver from prison those who are illegally detained there. Platek v. Aderhold, 5 Cir., 73 F.2d 173. The judgment discharging the writ is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The complaint made is that petitioner is ill, and so treated as to aggravate his illness, and especially by preventing his endeavors to help himself in the courts by legal process. On the hearing it appeared that appellant had never been disciplined and was allowed to carry on a considerable correspondence with lawyers, and that there had been no interference with his seeking this writ of habeas corpus. The courts have no function to superintend the treatment of prisoners in the penitentiary, but only to deliver from prison those who are illegally detained there. Platek v. Aderhold, 5 Cir., 73 F.2d 173. The judgment discharging the writ is affirmed.

Sarshik v. Sanford, 142 F.2d 676, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3482 (5th Cir. 1944).

Pincite

142 F.2d 676 (Sarshik v. Sanford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related