Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Wheatley v. Hunter, Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kan, 192 F.2d 376, 10th Cir. (1951)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views1 page
    The court affirmed the dismissal of a writ of habeas corpus filed by a prisoner. The prisoner's application for the writ failed to allege that he had first sought relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 in the court that sentenced him or show that motion under that section would be inadequate to challenge the legality of his detention. Relief through habeas corpus requires showing prior and unsuccessful use of the primary avenue for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1951-11-26 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 192 F.2d 376 Docket: 4364

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The court affirmed the dismissal of a writ of habeas corpus filed by a prisoner. The prisoner's application for the writ failed to allege that he had first sought relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 in the court that sentenced him or show that motion under that section would be inadequate to challenge the legality of his detention. Relief through habeas corpus requires showing prior and unsuccessful use of the primary avenue for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views1 page

    Wheatley v. Hunter, Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kan, 192 F.2d 376, 10th Cir. (1951)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The court affirmed the dismissal of a writ of habeas corpus filed by a prisoner. The prisoner's application for the writ failed to allege that he had first sought relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 in the court that sentenced him or show that motion under that section would be inadequate to challenge the legality of his detention. Relief through habeas corpus requires showing prior and unsuccessful use of the primary avenue for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    192 F.

    2d 376

    WHEATLEY
    v.
    HUNTER, Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kan.
    No. 4364.

    United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.


    November 26, 1951.

    Robert G. Braden, Wichita, Kan., for appellant.


    Lester Luther, U. S. Atty., Topeka, Kan., (Eugene W. Davis, Asst. U. S.
    Atty., Topeka, Kan., on the brief), for appellee.
    Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and BRATTON and MURRAH, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    This is an appeal from an order dismissing a writ of habeas corpus. The


    application wholly failed to allege that the petitioner had applied for relief
    under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255, or that the court which sentenced him had denied
    him relief under that section, and that the remedy by motion under that section
    was inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.

    The order is affirmed.

    You might also like