United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Lark v. A. T. Rundle, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania

Third Circuit

United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Lark v. A. T. Rundle, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania

387 F.2d 363

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedDecember 12, 1967

Docket16243_1

StatusPublished

This text of 387 F.2d 363 (United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Lark v. A. T. Rundle, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, 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

United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Lark v. A. T. Rundle, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania, 387 F.2d 363 (3d Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the denial by the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for a writ of habeas corpus to the relator, a state prisoner, who alleged that in violation of his constitutional rights he was denied the assistance of counsel in the state court in which he was convicted and sentenced. The district court held an evidentiary hearing on the relator’s petition and found, upon conflicting evidence, that the relator was in fact represented by competent counsel in the state court at the time he entered his plea of guilty and at the time he was sentenced. There was substantial evidence before the district court to support this finding and we cannot hold it to be erroneous.

The order of the district court will be affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the denial by the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for a writ of habeas corpus to the relator, a state prisoner, who alleged that in violation of his constitutional rights he was denied the assistance of counsel in the state court in which he was convicted and sentenced. The district court held an evidentiary hearing on the relator’s petition and found, upon conflicting evidence, that the relator was in fact represented by competent counsel in the state court at the time he entered his plea of guilty and at the time he was sentenced. There was substantial evidence before the district court to support this finding and we cannot hold it to be erroneous.

The order of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

387 F.2d 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-of-america-ex-rel-albert-lark-v-a-t-rundle-ca3-1967.