Legal Opinion
Ross v. Heyne
District Court, N.D. Indiana
Decided February 7, 1980No. S 79-127PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ALLEN SHARP, District Judge.
This Court now considers petitioner’s request for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Magnolia Ross bases her petition on two grounds contending in both a violation of due process. For the reasons stated below, this Court finds the petitioner was denied the fundamental due process rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and that her petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be granted.
Petitioner Magnolia Ross and five others, Robert S. Spencer, Floyd Fayson, Leroy Hemphill,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Townsend v. SainSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Napue v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Mooney v. HolohanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Magnolia Ross, Petitioner-Appellee-Appellant v. Robert Heyne and Theodore L. Sendak, Respondents-Appellants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
- Bragan v. MorganDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1992
- Atkins v. WrightDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1994
- Sulie v. DuckworthDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1988
- Holleman v. DuckworthDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.