United States ex rel. Paulding v. Mancusi
This text of 378 F.2d 368 (United States ex rel. Paulding v. Mancusi) 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.
Opinion
We deny the motions and dismiss the petition, without prejudice to petitioner’s right to renew his petition in the district court should appropriate proceedings for the relief herein sought be denied in the New York State courts. United States ex rel. Martin v. McMann, 348 F.2d 896 (2 Cir. 1965); United States ex rel. Bagley v. LaVallee, 332 F.2d 890, 892 (2 Cir. 1964). In light of People ex rel. Keitt v. McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257, 273 N.Y.S.2d 897, 220 N.E.2d 653 (1966), the broadened scope of habeas corpus in New York makes it appropriate for the petitioner to seek whatever remedy he may have in such a proceeding in the first instance.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
378 F.2d 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-ex-rel-paulding-v-mancusi-ca2-1966.