Kelley v. Kropp, 19818.
Decision Date | 22 April 1970 |
Docket Number | No. 19818.,19818. |
Citation | 424 F.2d 518 |
Parties | Harvey KELLEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George A. KROPP, Warden State Prison of Southern Michigan, Respondent-Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Harvey Kelley, pro se.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Stewart H. Greeman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing Mich., for appellee.
Before WEICK and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges, and CECIL, Senior Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal by Harvey Kelley, petitioner-appellant, from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The appellant is confined in the State Prison of Southern Michigan at Jackson, where he is serving a sentence of fifteen to thirty years under a conviction for robbery armed.
This is appellant's second petition in the District Court for a writ of habeas corpus. In his first petition he claimed that he was denied a speedy trial in contravention of his rights guaranteed under the Constitution of the United States. This petition was denied October 14, 1966, in an opinion by the Honorable Wade McCree, then a district judge and now a member of this Court. Kelley v. Kropp, D.C., 259 F.Supp. 417. No appeal was taken from that decision.
The petition now before us involves the application of M.S.A. 28.969(1) and (3). These sections provide in part:
It is claimed (1) that the court lost jurisdiction of the appellant by failing to bring him to trial within 180 days as provided by the statute and (2) that the indiscriminate application of the 180 day rule was a denial of the equal protection of the law within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
The facts of the case are stated in detail in the opinion of Judge McCree in Kelley v. Kropp, supra. Briefly, they are as follows: On December 4, 1961 the appellant was transferred from Marquette Prison where he was serving two concurrent sentences to Detroit to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Asher, Docket No. 5673
...by the prosecution does not necessarily preclude a finding that the prosecution moved in good faith towards trial. See Kelley v. Kropp (C.A. 6, 1970), 424 F.2d 518. Second, defendant complains of the trial court's excusing a venireman for cause after the venireman had indicated that she did......