From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hall v. Crouse

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Dec 14, 1964
339 F.2d 316 (10th Cir. 1964)

Opinion

No. 7892.

December 14, 1964.

John R. McCandless, Norman, Okla., for appellant.

Richard H. Seaton, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Kansas (William M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen. of Kansas, on the brief), for appellee.

Before LEWIS, BREITENSTEIN and HILL, Circuit Judges.


The appellant, a state prisoner, was denied relief after a full evidentiary hearing upon his petition for a writ of habeas corpus lodged with the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. He contends upon appeal, as he did below, that his state court conviction was not warranted by the evidence and is so faulty in such regard as to deny him due process of law.

The record of the state court proceedings is not devoid of evidentiary support so as to warrant relief by habeas corpus. See Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199, 80 S.Ct. 624, 4 L. Ed.2d 654. A summary of the evidence is set forth in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Kansas, State v. Hall, 182 Kan. 331, 320 P.2d 860, and was held sufficient by that court to sustain the conviction.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Hall v. Crouse

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Dec 14, 1964
339 F.2d 316 (10th Cir. 1964)
Case details for

Hall v. Crouse

Case Details

Full title:Charles Henry HALL, Appellant, v. Sherman H. CROUSE, Warden, Kansas State…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Dec 14, 1964

Citations

339 F.2d 316 (10th Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

Tinoco v. United States

The question is not whether the evidence was sufficient, but whether the verdict of guilty was so devoid of…

Sheppard v. Maxwell

Without attempting to assess petitioner's actual guilt or innocence, this recital clearly establishes that…