Willie Ben McCrary v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

Willie Ben McCrary v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

451 F.2d 360, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7202

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 9, 1971

Docket71-1665

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 451 F.2d 360 (Willie Ben McCrary 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

Willie Ben McCrary v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 451 F.2d 360, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7202 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court denying the petition of a Florida state prisoner for the writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.

McCrary is serving a 25 year sentence for armed robbery, having been convicted upon trial by jury. No direct appeal was taken. A motion to vacate sentence filed in the state trial court pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 1.850, 33 F.S.A., was denied after an evidentiary hearing and affirmed on appeal. McCrary v. State, Fla.App.1969, 220 So.2d 445.

The single issue before the court below was whether the prosecution knowingly used perjured testimony to obtain a conviction. McCrary alleged that the state prosecuting attorney promised Mc-Crary’s co-defendant a probated sentence and paid him five dollars to testify that McCrary participated in the crime. This same issue was the subject of the evidentiary hearing in the state court at which the prosecutor testified that he paid no money and made no promises to obtain the co-defendant’s testimony. Mc-Crary offered the testimony of the co-defendant in support of his allegations. The state court found no credible testimony to support McCrary’s allegations. The United States District Court found that McCrary was afforded a full and fair state hearing and adopted the state court’s findings as its own.

The District Court is not required to hold a second evidentiary hearing in these circumstances. Ryan v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1970, 424 F.2d 198.

A review of the record, including the transcript of the state evidentiary hearing, reveals no clear error in the findings of the District Court. 28 U.S. C.A. § 2254. The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court denying the petition of a Florida state prisoner for the writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.

McCrary is serving a 25 year sentence for armed robbery, having been convicted upon trial by jury. No direct appeal was taken. A motion to vacate sentence filed in the state trial court pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 1.850, 33 F.S.A., was denied after an evidentiary hearing and affirmed on appeal. McCrary v. State, Fla.App.1969, 220 So.2d 445.

The single issue before the court below was whether the prosecution knowingly used perjured testimony to obtain a conviction. McCrary alleged that the state prosecuting attorney promised Mc-Crary’s co-defendant a probated sentence and paid him five dollars to testify that McCrary participated in the crime. This same issue was the subject of the evidentiary hearing in the state court at which the prosecutor testified that he paid no money and made no promises to obtain the co-defendant’s testimony. Mc-Crary offered the testimony of the co-defendant in support of his allegations. The state court found no credible testimony to support McCrary’s allegations. The United States District Court found that McCrary was afforded a full and fair state hearing and adopted the state court’s findings as its own.

The District Court is not required to hold a second evidentiary hearing in these circumstances. Ryan v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1970, 424 F.2d 198.

A review of the record, including the transcript of the state evidentiary hearing, reveals no clear error in the findings of the District Court. 28 U.S. C.A. § 2254. The judgment below is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

451 F.2d 360, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-ben-mccrary-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack