From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dotson v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jan 31, 1963
314 F.2d 50 (10th Cir. 1963)

Opinion

No. 7166.

January 31, 1963.

Charles Edward Palmer, Denver, Colo. (Dawson, Nagel, Sherman Howard, Denver, Colo., with him on the brief), for appellant.

Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U.S. Atty. (Newell A. George, U.S. Atty., with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and PICKETT and LEWIS, Circuit Judges.


Petitioner is presently confined in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. An application for a writ of habeas corpus was considered by the District Court for the District of Kansas and petitioner was denied, without a hearing, permission to proceed in forma pauperis by order indicating the petition contained only claims earlier considered and rejected by this court, Dotson v. United States, 10 Cir., 287 F.2d 868. We allowed petitioner to proceed in this court in forma pauperis in order to review the District Court's order.

Our earlier review of petitioner's claims, some 46 of them, rejected all such claims properly before the court. Petitioner now asserts that our decision does not bar him from further presenting claims which were not then properly before the court. This argument has no present relevancy to the instant application for a writ of habeas corpus. The claims now made relative to a denial of constitutional rights were specifically rejected in our prior decision and the remaining allegations that attack the admission of evidence and the sufficiency of the evidence are not properly reached by habeas corpus.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Dotson v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jan 31, 1963
314 F.2d 50 (10th Cir. 1963)
Case details for

Dotson v. United States

Case Details

Full title:Robert V. DOTSON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Jan 31, 1963

Citations

314 F.2d 50 (10th Cir. 1963)

Citing Cases

Wagenknecht v. Crouse

Considering the case upon its merits, as the trial court did, we find no error. A state prisoner is entitled…