Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

588 F.2d 169

Docket No. 78-2741

Smith v. Bell

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Jan. 18, 1979.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1979-01-18

2 counsel of record

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Smith v. Bell

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1979-01-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2011

5 federal appellate ·

5019791980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.*

¶2Freddie D. Smith, pro se.

¶3Kenneth J. Mighell, U. S. Atty., Fort Worth, Tex., Arnaldo N. Cavazos, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Dallas, Tex., for respondents-appellees.

¶4Before RONEY, GEE and FAY, Circuit Judges.

¶6PER CURIAM:

¶7Appellant, Freddie D. Smith, attacks a denial of parole on a number of grounds. Appellant alleges that the Parole Commission and its officials improperly denied his release on parole by: (1) not giving reasons for such a denial and a summary of the information relied upon; (2) failing to release him in May of 1977, his “presumptive parole date” as set by a parole panel in May, 1975; (3) failing to follow the directives of the sentencing court; and, (4) subjecting him to double jeopardy. In addition, appellant complains of prejudice by the United States Magistrate to whom the matter was referred for recommendations. On June 30, 1978, Judge Robert Hill adopted, modified and supplemented the recommendations of the magistrate. In this order denying the relief sought, Judge Hill dealt with the issues presented. For the reasons stated therein, we affirm. See 462 F.Supp. 55 (D.C.1978).

/588/f2d/169 · .json · Public domain