Dowd v. United States Cook, No. 66

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtBLACK
PartiesDOWD v. UNITED STATES ex rel. COOK
Docket NumberNo. 66
Decision Date02 January 1951

340 U.S. 206
71 S.Ct. 262
95 L.Ed. 215
DOWD

v.

UNITED STATES ex rel. COOK.

No. 66.
Argued Nov. 28, 1950.
Decided Jan. 2, 1951.

Page 207

Mr. Charles F. O'Connor, Indianapolis, Ind., for petitioner.

Mr. William S. Isham, Fowler, Ind., for respondent.

Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.

Respondent, Lawrence E. Cook, brought this habeas corpus proceeding in the United States District Court in 1948. After hearing evidence, the District Court found as follows: In 1931 respondent was convicted of murder in an Indiana court, sentenced to life imprisonment, and immediately confined in the state penitentiary. Within the six-month period allowed for appeal as of right by Indiana law, respondent prepared proper appeal papers. His efforts to file the documents in the state supreme court, however, were frustrated by the warden acting pursuant to prison rules. Subsequently, but after the six-month period had expired, the ban on sending papers from the prison was lifted and respondent unsuccessfully sought to have the state courts review his conviction by coram nobis in 19371 and by habeas corpus in 1945.2

Page 208

In 1946 his petition to the Supreme Court of Indiana for a delayed appeal was denied.3 On these findings, the District Court held that there had been a denial of equal protection of the law for which the State provided no remedy, and ordered respondent's discharge. The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. 180 F.2d 212.

In this Court the State admits, as it must, that a discriminatory denial of the statutory right of appeal is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Cochran v. State of Kansas, 316 U.S. 255, 62 S.Ct. 1068, 86 L.Ed. 1453. It contends, however, that the 1946 litigation in the Supreme Court of Indiana established that the prison authorities had not prevented a timely appeal by respondent, and that the principle of res judicata precluded a contrary determination of this fact by the District Court. Even if the rule of res judicata were applicable in habeas corpus proceedings, but cf. Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 105, 62 S.Ct. 964, 966, 86 L.Ed. 1302, it would have no bearing in the present case. The Indiana court made only one finding, and that pertained to a matter not now in dispute.4 Moreover, so far as the suppression of respondent's original appeal papers is concerned, the record before us strongly indicates that the finding ascribed to the state supreme court could not have been made.

The State also contends that despite the denial of equal protection, respondent is no longer entitled to relief because he 'waived' his right of appeal. The argument is that the ban on sending papers from the prison suspended the statutory limitation on the time for review so that

Page 209

respondent could have appealed within six months from the date the restraint was removed in 1933. We cannot accept this view. In 1931 Indiana appellate jurisdiction apparently was conditioned on a timely filing of the proper...

To continue reading

Request your trial
219 practice notes
  • Edwards v. Schmidt, No. 70-C-97.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. Western District of Wisconsin
    • January 5, 1971
    ...747, 21 L. Ed.2d 718 (1969); Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 83 S.Ct. 373, 9 L.Ed. 2d 285 (1963); Dowd v. United States ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 71 S.Ct. 262, 95 L.Ed. 215 (1951); Ex parte Hull, 312 U.S. 546, 61 S.Ct. 640, 85 L.Ed. 1034 (1941); United States ex rel. Westbrook v. Rando......
  • State v. Morales, No. 14908
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • April 25, 1995
    ...relief whatsoever to a criminal defendant who possibly has been prejudiced as a result of the negligence of the state. See Dowd v. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209-10, 71 S.Ct. 262, 263-64, 95 L.Ed. 215 Rather, the trial court may fashion another remedy that appropriately ameliorates or offsets the ......
  • State v. Phidd, No. 13999
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Connecticut
    • May 23, 1996
    ...constitutional improprieties may be warranted, failing which the petitioner may be discharged. See Dowd v. United States ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209, 71 S.Ct. 262, 263-64, 95 L.Ed. 215 (1951); see State v. Nash, 149 Conn. 655, 657-58, 183 A.2d 275, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 868, 83 S.Ct. 1......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 2190
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • April 2, 2018
    ...of "belated" or "delayed" (as referred to historically) appeals is traced to the Supreme Court's decision in Dowd v. U.S. ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209, 71 S. Ct. 262, 264 (1951); see also Wilson v. State, 284 Md. 664, 673, 399 A.2d 256, 261 (1979) (utilizing delayed and belated appeal in......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
219 cases
  • Edwards v. Schmidt, No. 70-C-97.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. Western District of Wisconsin
    • January 5, 1971
    ...747, 21 L. Ed.2d 718 (1969); Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 83 S.Ct. 373, 9 L.Ed. 2d 285 (1963); Dowd v. United States ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 71 S.Ct. 262, 95 L.Ed. 215 (1951); Ex parte Hull, 312 U.S. 546, 61 S.Ct. 640, 85 L.Ed. 1034 (1941); United States ex rel. Westbrook v. Rando......
  • State v. Morales, No. 14908
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • April 25, 1995
    ...relief whatsoever to a criminal defendant who possibly has been prejudiced as a result of the negligence of the state. See Dowd v. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209-10, 71 S.Ct. 262, 263-64, 95 L.Ed. 215 Rather, the trial court may fashion another remedy that appropriately ameliorates or offsets the ......
  • State v. Phidd, No. 13999
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Connecticut
    • May 23, 1996
    ...constitutional improprieties may be warranted, failing which the petitioner may be discharged. See Dowd v. United States ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209, 71 S.Ct. 262, 263-64, 95 L.Ed. 215 (1951); see State v. Nash, 149 Conn. 655, 657-58, 183 A.2d 275, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 868, 83 S.Ct. 1......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 2190
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • April 2, 2018
    ...of "belated" or "delayed" (as referred to historically) appeals is traced to the Supreme Court's decision in Dowd v. U.S. ex rel. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 209, 71 S. Ct. 262, 264 (1951); see also Wilson v. State, 284 Md. 664, 673, 399 A.2d 256, 261 (1979) (utilizing delayed and belated appeal in......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT