Virgil Hayward v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

Virgil Hayward v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

454 F.2d 733, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11777

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 18, 1972

Docket71-2732

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 454 F.2d 733 (Virgil Hayward v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Virgil Hayward v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 454 F.2d 733, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11777 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

By petition for writ of habeas corpus, Virgil Hayward is seeking relief from three convictions for uttering forged checks and one for escape. Represented by counsel, he pled guilty to these charges in the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida. Although there was no direct appeal, petitioner has adequately exhausted his state post-conviction remedies, as is required by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Petitioner’s sole contention is that his convictions are invalid because the criminal informations were not properly verified by the state’s attorney. In support of this contention, Haywood relies on a Florida case which was reversed on appeal. The Florida Supreme Court has now held that formal defects in an information not objected to prior to trial do not affect the validity of the conviction, and cannot be complained of after verdict. State v. Polo, 242 So.2d 457 (Fla.1970).

We agree with the district court that this appeal involves a matter of state law which does not amount to violation of any federally protected right of the appellant. See United States ex rel. Budd v. Maroney, 398 F.2d 806 (3d Cir. 1968); Selgado v. Baker, 394 F.2d 831 (10th Cir. 1968); Johnson v. Beto, 383 F.2d 197 (5th Cir. 1967), cert, den., 393 U.S. 868, 89 S.Ct. 153, 21 L.Ed.2d 136 (1968). The denial of the petition is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

By petition for writ of habeas corpus, Virgil Hayward is seeking relief from three convictions for uttering forged checks and one for escape. Represented by counsel, he pled guilty to these charges in the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida. Although there was no direct appeal, petitioner has adequately exhausted his state post-conviction remedies, as is required by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Petitioner’s sole contention is that his convictions are invalid because the criminal informations were not properly verified by the state’s attorney. In support of this contention, Haywood relies on a Florida case which was reversed on appeal. The Florida Supreme Court has now held that formal defects in an information not objected to prior to trial do not affect the validity of the conviction, and cannot be complained of after verdict. State v. Polo, 242 So.2d 457 (Fla.1970).

We agree with the district court that this appeal involves a matter of state law which does not amount to violation of any federally protected right of the appellant. See United States ex rel. Budd v. Maroney, 398 F.2d 806 (3d Cir. 1968); Selgado v. Baker, 394 F.2d 831 (10th Cir. 1968); Johnson v. Beto, 383 F.2d 197 (5th Cir. 1967), cert, den., 393 U.S. 868, 89 S.Ct. 153, 21 L.Ed.2d 136 (1968). The denial of the petition is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

454 F.2d 733, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/virgil-hayward-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-corrections-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack