Moore v. Dutton, 25644.
| Decision Date | 05 July 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 25644.,25644. |
| Citation | 396 F.2d 782 |
| Parties | Robert Felton MOORE, Appellant, v. A. L. DUTTON, Warden, Georgia State Prison, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
A. Blenn Taylor, Jr., Brunswick, Ga., Murray M. Silver, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.
Mathew Robins, Asst. Atty. Gen., William R. Childers, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., G. Ernest Tidwell, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Marion O. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellees.
Before GEWIN and THORNBERRY, Circuit Judges, and EDENFIELD, District Judge.
The appellant, who alleges that he is an indigent Negro, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia in which he alleged that his conviction and death sentence for the crime of murder are illegal because his state court conviction was obtained by the use of a coerced confession; that he was unlawfully deprived of his right to counsel; and that members of the Negro race were systematically and unconstitutionally excluded from the grand jury which indicted him and the trial jury which found him guilty. He was tried and convicted in the Superior Court of Camden County, Georgia and sentenced to death by electrocution. We reverse and remand.
The United States District Court did not hold a plenary hearing with respect to the allegations of the petitioner. The record before us strongly indicates that the United States District Court did not examine and consider the state court record of the appellant's conviction or the state court record of the hearing held on his petition for writ of habeas corpus in the state court. On oral argument counsel for the appellee, evidently realizing that serious federal constitutional questions have been raised by the petition in the federal district court, forthrightly conceded that this cause should be reversed and remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia for a hearing.
Upon remand the United States District Court will examine the state court records involved for the purpose of making an independent determination whether the appellant has been deprived of any of his federal constitutional rights as claimed in his petition if such records are sufficient for that determination. If it is decided that the state court records are insufficient, the district court will hold a plenary hearing with respect to the alleged denial of such federal constitutional...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State of Texas v. Grundstrom
...adequately protect all of Grundstrom's constitutional rights. See Peters v. Rutledge, 5 Cir. 1968, 397 F.2d 731 June 1968; Moore v. Dutton, 5 Cir. 1968, 396 F.2d 782 May 21, 1968; Clarke v. Grimes, 374 F.2d 550, 552 (5 Cir. 1967).1 We note that the State of Texas has recently broadened its ......
-
Phelper v. Decker
...where post-conviction remedies are available. See, for Georgia, Peters v. Rutledge, 5 Cir., 1968, 397 F.2d 731; accord, Moore v. Dutton, 5 Cir., 1968, 396 F.2d 782; for Florida, Milton v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1968, 396 F.2d 28 See note 2 supra. 29 See also Fort v. City of Miami, 1967, 389 U.......
-
Williams v. Dutton
...that comity requires that the state courts determine this question. See Peters v. Rutledge, 5th Cir. 1968, 397 F.2d 731; Moore v. Dutton, 5th Cir. 1968, 396 F.2d 782; State of Texas v. Payton, 390 F.2d 261 (5th Cir. 10 See Ashley v. State of Texas, 319 F.2d 80 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 375 ......
-
Irving v. Breazeale
...v. Rutledge, 5th Cir. 1968, 397 F.2d 731 No. 25075. 25 See Peters v. Rutledge, 5th Cir. 1968, 397 F.2d 731 No. 25075; Moore v. Dutton, 5th Cir. 1968, 396 F.2d 782; State of Texas v. Payton, 390 F.2d 261 (5th Cir. 1968); Brent v. White, 5th Cir. 1968, 398 F.2d 503; Powers v. Hauck, 5th Cir. ......