Rodgers v. State of Louisiana
| Decision Date | 29 October 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 28137 Summary Calendar.,28137 Summary Calendar. |
| Citation | 418 F.2d 237 |
| Parties | Lamar Connelly RODGERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
LaMar Connelly Rodgers, pro se.
Nola White, First Asst. Atty. Gen. of Texas, Sam L. Jones, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Crawford C. Martin, Atty. Gen. of Texas., Hawthorne Phillips, Executive Asst., W. V. Geppert, Staff Legal Asst., Robert C. Flowers, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for appellee.
Before BELL, AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.
LaMar Connelly Rodgers, while incarcerated in the Harris County, Texas, jail, petitioned the District Court for the Southern District of Texas for a writ of habeas corpus.1 Rodgers is in the custody of the State of Texas as a result of his conviction there of robbery by assault. His petition does not challenge this Texas conviction. Instead, it challenges seven sentences imposed upon Rodgers by various Louisiana state courts between 1949 and 1954. Since neither the State of Louisiana nor its officials acting in their official capacities are subject to service of process in Texas, the District Judge properly dismissed Rodgers' petition. See Word v. North Carolina, 4 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 352, 357 (en banc). Habeas corpus relief from whatever restrictions are imposed upon Rodgers by the Louisiana sentences is not obtainable in a court lacking jurisdiction to issue the writ. Accordingly, we affirm.
Affirmed.
1 We have concluded on the merits that this case is of the character that does not justify oral argument. Therefore, we have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties thereof in writing. 5 Cir.R. 18; see Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir., 1969, 417 F.2d 526, Part I No. 27439, October 7; Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir., 1969, 409 F.2d 804, 805-808.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Braden v. 8212 6516
...detainer is the proper forum in which to file the petition. See May v. Georgia, 409 F.2d 203 (5th Cir. 1969). See also Rodgers v. Louisiana, 418 F.2d 237 (5th Cir. 1969). Braden thus may find himself ensnared in what has aptly been termed 'Catch 2254'—unable to vindicate his constitutional ......
-
Braden v. 30TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF CMWLTH. OF KY.
...detainer is the proper forum in which to file the petition. See May v. Georgia, 409 F.2d 203 (5th Cir. 1969). See also Rodgers v. Louisiana, 418 F.2d 237 (5th Cir. 1969). Braden thus may find himself ensnared in what has aptly been termed "Catch 2254"—unable to vindicate his constitutional ......
-
Dillworth v. Barker, 72-1153 Summary Calendar.
...Florida. The district court, relying on Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 83 S.Ct. 373, 9 L.Ed.2d 285 (1963) and Rodgers v. State of Louisiana, 418 F.2d 237 (5th Cir., 1969), denied the petition, "There is doubt that a state prisoner who has been placed on parole is in `custody\' as that w......
-
Theriault v. State of Mississippi, 29900 Summary Calendar.
...419 F.2d 1308. The Court refused to entertain a collateral attack on the Mississippi state convictions. We agree. See Rodgers v. Louisiana, 5 Cir., 1969, 418 F.2d 237; Word v. North Carolina, 4 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 352. Appellant completed service of his Mississippi sentences several years ......