Sewell W. Rouzer v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania

316 F.2d 736
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedMay 9, 1963
Docket14274_1
StatusPublished

This text of 316 F.2d 736 (Sewell W. Rouzer v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sewell W. Rouzer v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, 316 F.2d 736 (3d Cir. 1963).

Opinion

316 F.2d 736

Sewell W. ROUZER, Appellant,
v.
Harry E. RUSSELL, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania.

No. 14274.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Submitted April 25, 1963.

Decided May 9, 1963.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania; Frederick V. Follmer, Judge.

Sewell W. Rouzer, pro se.

Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., Harrisburg, Pa. (Walter E. Alessandroni, Atty. Gen., Harrisburg, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before KALODNER, HASTIE and GANEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On review of the record we find no error. The Order of the District Court dismissing appellant's original petition with supplements for a writ of habeas corpus will be affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
316 F.2d 736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sewell-w-rouzer-v-harry-e-russell-superintendent-s-ca3-1963.