Smith v. Hiatt, 165.
| Decision Date | 09 March 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 165.,165. |
| Citation | 54 F. Supp. 481 |
| Parties | SMITH v. HIATT, Warden. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania |
Herman F. Reich, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Lewisburg, Pa., for Warden Hiatt.
Robert Guy Smith, in pro. per.
This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Robert Guy Smith, a prisoner in the United States Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, alleging that "his constitutional right to legal representation" had been denied him, and that, having been surrendered by Federal authorities for sentence by a state court, he cannot now be held to be legally serving a Federal sentence. He then makes the somewhat inconsistent allegation that the lodging of a state detainer is a violation of his rights and that both the state and Federal sentences must be set aside.
It appears that he was originally arrested by the Pennsylvania State Police and, upon request, turned over to the Federal authorities. He was indicted in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on a charge of violating the Selective Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 301 et seq. The United States District Court, on a petition of the United States Attorney, entered an order on February 24, 1943, authorizing the Warden of the Allegheny County Jail to deliver the prisoner to the United States Marshal for the purpose of proceedings in the State Court, and "then to be returned immediately to the custody of the aforesaid Warden". A few days thereafter, under this order, he was arraigned in the state court, entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced. He was then returned to Federal custody and a state detainer was lodged against him. On March 3, 1943, he then entered his plea of guilty in the Federal Court, as follows:
The Court Record of Arraignment also shows:
"On this 8th day of March, 1943, came the United States Attorney, and the defendant Robert Guy Smith appearing in proper person, and having been advised of his constitutional right to counsel and having been asked whether he desired counsel by Court replied he did not."
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Huffman v. Alexander
...of his opinion the court cited Riddle v. Dyche, supra. See also United States ex rel. Grove v. Jackson, D.C., 16 F.Supp. 126; Smith v. Hiatt, D.C., 54 F.Supp. 481; Williams v. Huff, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 326, 146 F.2d 867; Bardwell v. Hiatt, D.C., 50 F.Supp. 913; Hill v. United States ex rel. Wam......
-
Adams v. Hiatt
...442, 31 S.Ct. 44, 54 L.Ed. 1101, 21 Ann.Cas. 849. 10 Respondent's Exhibit No. 1, Court-Martial Record page 18, et seq. 11 Smith v. Hiatt, D.C.M.D.Pa., 54 F. Supp. 481; Edminston v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 161 F.2d 691; Christakos v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 161 F.2d 692; Banach v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 161 F.2......
-
Bigrow v. Hiatt
...U.S. 11, 41 S. Ct. 227, 65 L.Ed. 475; Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler, 298 U.S. 460, 56 S.Ct. 760, 80 L.Ed. 1283; Smith v. Hiatt, D.C.M.D.Pa., 1944, 54 F.Supp. 481; Spann v. Zerbst, 5 Cir., 99 F.2d 336; Farnsworth v. Zerbst, 5 Cir., 98 F.2d 541; Riddle v. Dvche, 262 U.S. 333, 43 S.Ct.......
-
Ex parte Smith
...333, 43 S.Ct. 555, 67 L.Ed. 1009; Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler, 298 U.S. 460, 56 S.Ct. 760, 80 L.Ed. 1283; Smith v. Hiatt, D.C.M.D.Pa., 1944, 54 F.Supp. 481; Spann v. Zerbst, 5 Cir., 99 F.2d 336; Farnsworth v. Zerbst, 5 Cir., 98 F.2d 541, there was not in any event any evidence bef......