Manning v. State of Alabama
| Decision Date | 22 January 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75-3513 Summary Calendar.,75-3513 Summary Calendar. |
| Citation | 526 F.2d 355 |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
| Parties | Wallace M. MANNING, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent-Appellee. |
Wallace M. Manning, pro se.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., Sam L. Webb, Asst. Atty. Gen., Walter S. Turner, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., Montgomery, Ala., for respondent-appellee.
Before GEWIN, GOLDBERG and DYER, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a decision denying a state prisoner habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In July 1972 petitioner Manning was in the custody of the state of Alabama, confined in the Jefferson County jail, awaiting trial on state charges of buying, concealing, and receiving stolen property. Petitioner was also under indictment for violations of federal laws in the Southern District of Alabama. To secure his presence in federal court, a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum was issued; and Manning was transferred to Mobile. A judgment of conviction was entered in federal court, and Manning was sentenced to a two year term of imprisonment, to commence upon his release from state custody. Thereafter he was returned to the custody of the sheriff of Jefferson County. After a trial by jury on the state charges, he was convicted and sentenced by the Circuit Court of Jefferson County to a seven year term of imprisonment. He immediately filed a notice of appeal. Under Alabama law, sentence is automatically suspended on appeal unless the defendant requests a so-called working appeal. Code of Alabama, tit. 15, § 373 (1958). When a defendant requests a working appeal, sentence begins to run immediately. On the day he was sentenced Manning wrote his court-appointed attorney requesting a working appeal. By letter dated February 16, 1973 addressed to the judge who tried the case, Manning's counsel requested a working appeal.
On March 8, 1973 Manning was delivered to the custody of federal authorities to commence serving the two-year sentence imposed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. The state of Alabama filed a detainer at the federal prison in Atlanta where Manning was held, based upon the seven-year sentence that petitioner had received in state court. On October 30, 1973, while he was still in federal custody, his state conviction was affirmed by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. He was released from federal custody and turned over to the Alabama authorities on August 26, 1974 to commence serving his seven year state sentence.
In his § 2254 petition for habeas corpus, Manning initially raised two grounds for relief. First, he contended that the state of Alabama lost jurisdiction over him when he was surrendered to federal authorities. He has abandoned this contention on appeal.
His second contention is that at the time he was transferred to the custody of the federal authorities, his state sentence had already begun to run. He argues that under Alabama law a request for a working appeal must be honored. Since he had requested a working appeal prior to his transfer to federal custody, he had already begun to serve his state sentence; his transfer to federal authorities did not suspend the time being served for the state offense. He seeks credit on his state sentence for the time served in the federal penitentiary.
The district judge acknowledged that "this case presents novel problems regarding proper credit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hunt v. Tucker
...1339 (5th Cir. 1976). State prisoners must have fairly presented the substance of their claim to the state courts. See Manning v. Alabama, 526 F.2d 355 (5th Cir.1976); Alonzo v. Estelle, 500 F.2d 672 (5th Respondents assert that the petitioner dis-entitled himself to relief in this court by......
-
Heath v. Jones
...presented to the state courts. See Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 275-78, 92 S.Ct. 509, 512-14, 30 L.Ed.2d 438 (1971); Manning v. Alabama, 526 F.2d 355 (5th Cir.1976); Alonzo v. Estelle, 500 F.2d 672 (5th Furthermore, a state habeas petitioner must exhaust state remedies as to all his clai......
-
Shriner v. Wainwright, TCA 82-0832.
...v. Davis, 421 U.S. 482, 95 S.Ct. 1748, 44 L.Ed.2d 317 (1975); McClain v. Kitchen, 659 F.2d 870 (8th Cir.1981); Manning v. State of Alabama, 526 F.2d 355 (5th Cir.1976). This court would note that during the sentencing phase Judge Green gave the jury correct instructions on the law and prope......
- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. ROGERS BROTHERS WHOLESALERS