Lee v. State of Kansas

Decision Date28 May 1965
Docket NumberNo. 8111.,8111.
Citation346 F.2d 48
PartiesVincent LEE, Appellant, v. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Tosh Suyematsu, Cheyenne, Wyo., for appellant.

Richard H. Seaton, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Kansas, Topeka, Kan. (Robert C. Londerholm, Atty. Gen. of Kansas, with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, BREITENSTEIN and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court denied without hearing the petition of appellant, a state prisoner, for federal habeas corpus. The sole ground for relief is the alleged denial by the Kansas Supreme Court of a speedy hearing on appellant's appeal to that court. Such appeal was filed on August 11, 1964, and was set for hearing on May 10, 1965. At the oral argument before us, counsel for appellee stated, and counsel for appellant did not deny, that the hearing was continued on the motion of appellant. In the circumstances, federal habeas corpus is not available because appellant has not exhausted the remedies available in the state courts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254; Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 435, 83 S. Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837; Ex Parte Davis, 318 U.S. 412, 63 S.Ct. 679, 87 L.Ed. 868; Henry v. Tinsley, 10 Cir., 344 F.2d 109, decided April 12, 1965. The claim of denial of equal protection because of the delay deserves no consideration because it is neither alleged nor shown that the Kansas Supreme Court has in any way discriminated against appellant in its procedural actions.

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Dixon v. State of Florida, 24578.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • January 3, 1968
    ...lapse of time does not, in and of itself, constitute a denial of a constitutional right. Ballay v. Patterson, Warden, 10th Cir. Lee v. State of Kansas, 10th Cir., 346 F.2d 48. But an inordinate, excessive and inexcusable delay may very well amount to a denial of due process cognizable in fe......
  • Prescher v. Crouse, 273-70.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • September 9, 1970
    ...Cir. 1966); Smith v. State of Kansas, 356 F.2d 654 (10th Cir. 1966). 7 Kelly v. Crouse, 352 F.2d 506 (10th Cir. 1965); Lee v. State of Kansas, 346 F.2d 48 (10th Cir. 1965). ...
  • Stevens v. HUMBLE OIL & REFINING COMPANY
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • July 21, 1965
    ...... & Refining Company, to pay the disputed royalties into an escrow fund, pending the outcome of a suit brought by the plaintiffs in a Louisiana state court, in 1958, over the same tract of land as is claimed here. About two years ago, having made no discernible progress in state court, the ......
  • Denney v. State of Kansas
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • January 14, 1971
    ...be exhausted if an appeal from a state conviction is pending. Kessinger v. Page, 369 F.2d 799 (10th Cir. 1966) and Lee v. State of Kansas, 346 F.2d 48 (10th Cir. 1965). He must thereafter also initiate state postconviction relief pursuant to K.S.A. § 60-1507. Brown v. Crouse, 395 F.2d 755 (......
  • 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