Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 17 views

    Lewis Wesley Huston v. State of Kansas, 390 F.2d 156, 10th Cir. (1968)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case where Lewis Huston appeals to have Kansas try him on pending state criminal charges while he is serving a federal sentence. The court summarizes that while federal courts can issue writs to have defendants produced for trial, the writ must be issued by the state court where charges are pending. The court also notes that states are not required to try defendants on state charges during a federal sentence, and that Huston's argument that Kansas denied him a speedy trial by surrendering him to federal custody without proceeding on state charges must first be addressed in state courts. The court ultimately affirms the denial of Huston's request.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Lewis Wesley Huston v. State of Kansas, 390 F.2d 156, 10th Cir. (1968)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    17 views2 pages
    The document is a court case where Lewis Huston appeals to have Kansas try him on pending state criminal charges while he is serving a federal sentence. The court summarizes that while federal courts can issue writs to have defendants produced for trial, the writ must be issued by the state court where charges are pending. The court also notes that states are not required to try defendants on state charges during a federal sentence, and that Huston's argument that Kansas denied him a speedy trial by surrendering him to federal custody without proceeding on state charges must first be addressed in state courts. The court ultimately affirms the denial of Huston's request.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1968-04-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 390 F.2d 156 Docket: 9548

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document is a court case where Lewis Huston appeals to have Kansas try him on pending state criminal charges while he is serving a federal sentence. The court summarizes that while federal courts can issue writs to have defendants produced for trial, the writ must be issued by the state court where charges are pending. The court also notes that states are not required to try defendants on state charges during a federal sentence, and that Huston's argument that Kansas denied him a speedy trial by surrendering him to federal custody without proceeding on state charges must first be addressed in state courts. The court ultimately affirms the denial of Huston's request.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    17 views2 pages

    Lewis Wesley Huston v. State of Kansas, 390 F.2d 156, 10th Cir. (1968)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case where Lewis Huston appeals to have Kansas try him on pending state criminal charges while he is serving a federal sentence. The court summarizes that while federal courts can issue writs to have defendants produced for trial, the writ must be issued by the state court where charges are pending. The court also notes that states are not required to try defendants on state charges during a federal sentence, and that Huston's argument that Kansas denied him a speedy trial by surrendering him to federal custody without proceeding on state charges must first be addressed in state courts. The court ultimately affirms the denial of Huston's request.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    390 F.

    2d 156

    Lewis Wesley HUSTON, Appellant,


    v.
    STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee.
    No. 9548.

    United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.


    February 23, 1968.
    Rehearing Denied April 5, 1968.

    Richard P. Holme, Denver, Colo., for appellant.


    Jon K. Sargent, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Robert C. Londerholm, Atty. Gen., on
    the brief), for appellee.
    Before BREITENSTEIN, SETH and HICKEY, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    Appellant is in custody at the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas.


    In this action he does not attack the federal sentence he is serving; instead he
    asks this court to require the state of Kansas to try him on state criminal charges
    pending against him. He complains that a detainer warrant was filed against
    him by Kansas authorities, and he is being denied a speedy trial on the state
    charges. He argues that the federal courts have the authority under 28 U.S.C.
    2241(c) (5) to issue a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum to have him
    brought before the Kansas court for trial.

    The record shows that appellant was arrested by Kansas authorities, and state
    charges were filed. He was arraigned on these charges, and bond was set. He
    was however then released to federal authorities for prosecution on federal
    charges, and was convicted and sentenced on these charges. After he was
    confined in the federal penitentiary, the state of Kansas lodged a detainer
    against him.

    Appellant sought a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum from the Kansas


    court where the state charges were pending, seeking prompt trial or dismissal of

    the charges. This petition was denied. He wrote the county attorney requesting
    a speedy trial, which request was denied. He also filed writs of mandamus
    seeking the same relief, first in the state district court and later in the Kansas
    Supreme Court. These were denied as well.
    4

    Appellant correctly perceives that 28 U.S.C. 2241(c) (5) authorizes a United


    States District Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum to
    produce a defendant for trial. Carbo v. United States, 364 U.S. 611, 81 S.Ct.
    338, 5 L.Ed.2d 329 (1961). The writ's use has been to bring a defendant in the
    custody of another sovereign to trial before the court issuing the writ. See
    Lawrence v. Willingham, 373 F.2d 731 (10th Cir. 1967); Lunsford v. Hudspeth,
    126 F.2d 653 (10th Cir. 1942). In order for the writ of habeas corpus ad
    prosequendum to be used to bring appellant to trial in a Kansas state court, the
    writ must issue from that court. Lawrence v. Willingham, supra.

    We have held that a state is not constitutionally compelled to bring a defendant


    to trial on state charges during the period of his confinement in a federal
    penitentiary. Naugle v. State of Oklahoma, 375 F.2d 424 (10th Cir. 1967);
    McCary v. State of Kansas, 281 F.2d 185 (10th Cir. 1960). Yet the need for a
    prompt trial on all charges and for all prisoners is apparent in view of the
    expanding use and sometimes abuse of the detainer warrant. The inmate who
    has a detainer warrant against him is necessarily faced with uncertainty, and
    often he is denied participation in many programs for rehabilitation because of
    a detainer. It is also common knowledge that relatively few detainers on federal
    inmates are followed by prosecution.

    Appellant further asserts that the state has denied him a speedy trial when,
    having arrested and charged him, it voluntarily surrendered him to the federal
    authorities for prosecution on other charges without proceeding to its own
    prosecution as it was free to do. Appellant, however, must in due course present
    that question to the state tribunals. Naugle v. State of Oklahoma, supra.

    Affirmed.

    You might also like