Nusser v. Aderhold
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Per curiam
The writ of habeas corpus was denied in the district court because the applicant, imprisoned under sentences imposed by a State Court, had not exhausted his remedies afforded by the State. Such exhaustion, including appeal to the State Supreme Court and review by the Supreme Court of the United States, is generally necessary. Ex parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114, 64 S.Ct. 448, 88 L.Ed. 572, and cases cited. On this point the application states in general terms that applicant has had an unsuccessful hearing on habeas corpus before a State judge, presented to him a bill of exceptions which he refused to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ex Parte HawkSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Salinger v. LoiselSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Perry v. McLendonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Day v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1931
- Andrews v. AderholdSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Darr v. BurfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Park v. ThompsonDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1973
- Darr v. BurfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Downs v. HudspethDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1948
- Wade v. MayoSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.