Legal Opinion

United States ex rel. Bland v. Nenna

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 11, 1968No. 503, Docket 32251PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We affirm in open court, for the reasons stated in Judge Frankel’s opinion, 282 F.Supp. 754 (S.D.N.Y.1968), the denial of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We reject the contention made by petitioner, who is awaiting trial, in the state court on charges of robbery, grand larceny, assault and possession of a loaded pistol, that he has been placed in double jeopardy in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, the state court having declared a mistrial in a prior trial on the same charges after a jury was impaneled, but before the introduction of any evidence, because…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States ex rel. Bland v. NennaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. James Mizell v. The Attorney General of the State of New York and Ano.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
  2. Mizell v. Attorney General of State of NYDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1977
  3. United States Ex Rel. Roy Bland v. Hon. Albert Nenna, as Warden, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API