Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

539 F.2d 572

Docket No. 76-2526

Thomas v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Sept. 27, 1976.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1976-09-27

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1976

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Patterson v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1976-09-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.*

¶2George Joseph Thomas, Jr., pro se.

¶3Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S. Atty., James C. Thomason, III, Asst. U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., for respondent-appellee.

¶4Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and GEW-IN and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

¶6PER CURIAM:

¶7In his habeas petition1 and briefs in this court appellant contends that (1) after the issuance of a parole violator’s warrant, he was denied a prompt revocation hearing as required by Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1974), and (2) the failure promptly to dispose of the parole violator’s charge requires that the federal detainer be lifted. Appellant was in custody on state charges at the time of issuance of the federal warrant and detainer. Hence, this case is controlled by Cook v. United States Attorney General, 488 F.2d. 667 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 846, 95 S.Ct. 8, 42 L.Ed.2d 75 (1974), in which we held that a revocation hearing *573was not required, at the commencement of the state imprisonment, oh an issued but unexecuted parole violator’s warrant.2 Accordingly, appellant’s contentions are without merit. The district court’s judgment denying the petition is AFFIRMED.

/539/f2d/572 · .json · Public domain