Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

483 F.2d 71

Docket No. 73-1859 Summary Calendar.*

Gorham v. Richardson

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1973-08-09

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 1980

7 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Scarpa v. U. S. Board of Parole · United States v. White

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1973-08-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Norman B. Gorham, pro se.

John W. Stokes, Jr., U. S. Atty., Anthony M. Arnold, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent-appellee.

Before WISDOM, AINSWORTH and CLARK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

In his petition for habeas corpus, Gorham alleges that the parole board deprived him of fundamental fairness and abused its discretion when it refused to grant him parole. As this Court, sitting en banc, has recently stated, "[i]n the absence of evidence of flagrant, unwarranted, or unauthorized action by the Board, it is not the function of the courts to review such proceedings." Scarpa v. U. S. Board of Parole (en banc), 5 Cir., 1973, 477 F.2d 278, 283. [Footnote omitted.] The record in the instant case reveals no evidence which would entitle Gorham to relief.

¶2

Affirmed.

/483/f2d/71 · .json · Public domain