United States ex rel. Blassingame v. Gengler

Second Circuit

United States ex rel. Blassingame v. Gengler

502 F.2d 1388

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedSeptember 12, 1974

DocketNo. 13, Docket 74-1249

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 502 F.2d 1388 (United States ex rel. Blassingame v. Gengler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States ex rel. Blassingame v. Gengler, 502 F.2d 1388 (2d Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The Legal Aid Society, continued as assigned counsel on this appeal from a denial of Blassingame’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, has moved to be relieved as counsel.

The only question presented for review is whether the unreasonable delay in holding Blassingame’s parole revocation hearing entitles him to release from custody. Subsequent to the district court’s decision a fair parole revocation hearing was held, at which Blassingame admitted five of the charged parole violations, and asserted no claim of prejudice resulting from the delay. The clear law of the Circuit is that such a hearing renders Blassingame’s custody lawful. United States ex rel. Buono v. Kenton, 287 F.2d 534 (2d Cir. 1961). Consequently, we grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the order of the district court.

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

PER CURIAM:

The Legal Aid Society, continued as assigned counsel on this appeal from a denial of Blassingame’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, has moved to be relieved as counsel.

The only question presented for review is whether the unreasonable delay in holding Blassingame’s parole revocation hearing entitles him to release from custody. Subsequent to the district court’s decision a fair parole revocation hearing was held, at which Blassingame admitted five of the charged parole violations, and asserted no claim of prejudice resulting from the delay. The clear law of the Circuit is that such a hearing renders Blassingame’s custody lawful. United States ex rel. Buono v. Kenton, 287 F.2d 534 (2d Cir. 1961). Consequently, we grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the order of the district court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 F.2d 1388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-ex-rel-blassingame-v-gengler-ca2-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack