Rogers v. Richmond, 755
| Citation | 357 U.S. 220,78 S.Ct. 1365,2 L.Ed.2d 1361 |
| Decision Date | 16 June 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 755,M,755 |
| Parties | Harold D. ROGERS, petitioner, v. Mark S. RICHMOND, Warden of Connecticut State Prison. isc |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
Mr. Louis H. Pollak, for petitioner.
Mr. Abraham S. Ullman, for respondent.
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied. We read the opinion of the Court of Appeals as holding that while the District Judge may, unless he finds a vital flaw in the State Court proceedings, accept the determination in such proceedings, he need not deem such determination binding, and may take testimony. See Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 506, et seq., 73 S.Ct. 397, 445, 97 L.Ed. 469.
To continue reading
Request your trial
34 cases
-
People v. Sigal
...the record for additional testimony. (Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed.2d 770, 785-786, 788; Rogers v. Richmond. 357 U.S. 220, 78 S.Ct. 1365, 2 L.Ed.2d 1361; Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 506, 73 S.Ct. 397, 97 L.Ed. 469, 514; see also United States ex rel. Rogers v. Rich......
-
Rogers v. Richmond
...binding, and may take testimony. See Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 506, et seq., 73 S.Ct. 397, 97 L.Ed. 469.' Rogers v. Richmond, 357 U.S. 220, 78 S.Ct. 1365, 2 L.Ed.2d 1361. Second Federal Habeas Corpus Proceeding.—On remand, the district judge had before him the entire transcript of the s......
-
Mach-Tronics, Incorporated v. Zirpoli
...and the state court has held that there was no coercion. See Cranor v. Gonzales, 9 Cir., 226 F.2d 83 and Rogers v. Richmond, 357 U.S. 220, 78 S.Ct. 1365, 2 L.Ed.2d 1361. 19 In that case, Chronicle owner of a television station which had been an outlet for NBC programs, alleged that the defe......
-
Fay v. Noia, 84
...Reed), 506, 73 S.Ct. 445 (opinion of Mr. Justice Frankfurter). We accompanied our denial of certiorari in Rogers v. Richmond, 357 U.S. 220, 78 S.Ct. 1365, 2 L.Ed.2d 1361, with an opinion in which we said: '* * * while the District Judge may, unless he finds a vital flaw in the State Court p......
Request a trial to view additional results