Simmons v. Hunter

Tenth Circuit

Simmons v. Hunter

179 F.2d 664

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 4, 1950

Docket3976_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 179 F.2d 664 (Simmons v. Hunter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Simmons v. Hunter, 179 F.2d 664 (10th Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a companion case to McMahan v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 179 F.2d 661. The cases were consolidated and argued together.

In this case, Simmons, while serving in the armed forces of the United States in Germany, was charged with violation of Article of War 92, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1564. He was tried and convicted by a court-martial and is now serving his sentence in the United States Federal Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas. He, likewise, has appealed from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas denying him any relief.

The questions of law in this case are identical with those of McMahan v. Hunter, and the decision herein is controlled by what we have said in the McMahan case. On the authority of that case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed without prejudice to appellant’s rights to file a new application for a writ of habeas corpus, after having first complied with the requirements of Article of War 53, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1525.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a companion case to McMahan v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 179 F.2d 661. The cases were consolidated and argued together.

In this case, Simmons, while serving in the armed forces of the United States in Germany, was charged with violation of Article of War 92, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1564. He was tried and convicted by a court-martial and is now serving his sentence in the United States Federal Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas. He, likewise, has appealed from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas denying him any relief.

The questions of law in this case are identical with those of McMahan v. Hunter, and the decision herein is controlled by what we have said in the McMahan case. On the authority of that case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed without prejudice to appellant’s rights to file a new application for a writ of habeas corpus, after having first complied with the requirements of Article of War 53, 10 U.S.C.A. § 1525.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F.2d 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-hunter-ca10-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack