From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Huffman

Supreme Court of Nebraska
Jun 1, 1973
207 N.W.2d 696 (Neb. 1973)

Opinion

No. 38904.

Filed June 1, 1973.

Post Conviction: Res Judicata. The trial court is not required to entertain successive motions under the Post Conviction Act for similar relief from the same prisoner.

Appeal from the District Court for Hall County: RONALD H. WEAVER, Judge. Affirmed.

Harold Huffman, pro se.

Clarence A. H. Meyer, Attorney General, and Ralph H. Gillan, for appellee.

Heard before WHITE, C. J., SPENCER, BOSLAUGH, SMITH, McCOWN, NEWTON, and CLINTON, JJ.


The defendant's conviction of forgery was affirmed in State v. Huffman, 185 Neb. 417, 176 N.W.2d 506. In a prior post conviction proceeding, sentences on two counts were vacated but relief was otherwise denied. State v. Huffman, 186 Neb. 809, 186 N.W.2d 715.

In this second proceeding under section 29-3001, R. S. Supp., 1972, the defendant has alleged no basis for further relief. The trial court is not required to entertain successive motions for similar relief from the same prisoner. State v. Pilgrim, 188 Neb. 213, 196 N.W.2d 162.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

WHITE, C. J., not participating.


Summaries of

State v. Huffman

Supreme Court of Nebraska
Jun 1, 1973
207 N.W.2d 696 (Neb. 1973)
Case details for

State v. Huffman

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE, v. HAROLD HUFFMAN, APPELLANT

Court:Supreme Court of Nebraska

Date published: Jun 1, 1973

Citations

207 N.W.2d 696 (Neb. 1973)
207 N.W.2d 696

Citing Cases

State v. Haskett

The issues raised by the defendant in his second motion were available at the time of his first motion and…

State v. Hall

"The trial court is not required to entertain successive motions under the Post Conviction Act for similar…