Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

276 F.2d 913

Docket No. 6292.

Melton v. Taylor

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1960-03-30

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently March 1973

11 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Zerbst v. Kidwell · Teague v. Looney · Groce v. Hudspeth

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1960-03-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

E. M. Heppenstall, Denver, Colo. (Samuel C. Jackson, Topeka, Kan., on brief), for appellant.

Wilbur G. Leonard, U. S. Atty., Council Grove, Kan., on brief for appellee.

Before PICKETT and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges, and SAVAGE, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

In this habeas corpus proceeding the claim is that appellant Melton had completed his federal sentence on April 26, 1956, and cannot be held under a parole violator's warrant which was issued in January, 1951, but not served upon appellant until his discharge from the Missouri State Penitentiary on March 28, 1959. The record discloses that after his release on parole Melton violated that parole and committed state offenses for which he was sentenced to the Missouri State Penitentiary. The trial court held that there was no unreasonable delay in the execution of the warrant, that it was lawfully served, and that the writ should be discharged. As service of the original sentence was interrupted by parole violation and incarceration in a state penal institution the full term of that sentence has not been completed and Melton is properly in custody. See Zerbst v. Kidwell, 304 U.S. 359, 58 S.Ct. 872, 82 L.Ed. 1399; Groce v. Hudspeth, 10 Cir., 121 F.2d 800; Teague v. Looney, 10 Cir., 268 F.2d 506.

¶2

Affirmed.

/276/f2d/913 · .json · Public domain