Smith v. Secretary of Navy, 74-1386
| Decision Date | 20 November 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 74-1386,74-1386 |
| Parties | Joseph Orby SMITH, Jr., Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF the NAVY, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Thomas M. Bradshaw, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.
Frederick Griffin, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for appellee.
Before GIBSON, Chief Judge, CLARK, Associate Justice, Retired, 1 and WEBSTER, Circuit Judge.
Upon a careful consideration of the record and of the briefs and arguments of the parties, the Court has concluded that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed for the reasons stated in Judge Oliver's well-reasoned memorandum opinion.
Although it is clear that Smith's 1942 court martial conviction was for non-service connected offenses, under the reasoning of O'Callaghan v. Parker, 395 U.S. 258, 89 S.Ct. 1683, 23 L.Ed.2d 291 (1969), retroactive relief upon this basis is not available. Gosa v. Mayden, 413 U.S. 665, 93 S.Ct. 2926, 37 L.Ed.2d 873 (1973). We are also of the opinion that the District Court correctly concluded that Smith must exhaust his administrative remedies under 10 U.S.C. 869 before applying to the courts for relief on his claim of the lack of a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel.
The judgment of the District Court dismissing the petition is hereby affirmed.
1 Associate Justice Tom C. Clark, United States Supreme Court, Retired, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hatfield v. Daugherty
... ... The court also explicitly overruled its earlier decision in Smith v. Commonwealth, 707 S.W.2d 342 (Ky.1986), which held that the question of ... ...
-
Kaiser v. Secretary of the Navy, 81-K-912.
...(1969); Angle v. Laird, 429 F.2d 892, 894 (10th Cir. 1974); Smith v. Secretary of Navy, 392 F.Supp. 428, 431 (W.D.Mo.1974), aff'd 506 F.2d 1250 (8th Cir. 1974); Kaiser v. Secretary of Navy, 525 F.Supp. 1226, 1229 (D.Colo.1981).2 The policy underlying the exhaustion rule is two-fold: First, ......
-
Ballenger v. Marsh, 82-2504
...of corrective action can be reviewed in federal court. Von Hoffburg v. Alexander, 615 F.2d 633, 641 (5th Cir.1980); Smith v. Secretary of Navy, 506 F.2d 1250 (8th Cir.1974). In this case both Ballenger's applications for review were filed after the period in which Board review is required. ......