Legal Opinion
Leland Carter Stanford v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided June 13, 1969No. 27252_1PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Per curiam
In this pro se case appellant has failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, FRAP, and it is therefore appropriate to dispose of this ease summarily pursuant to Rule 9(c) (2) of this Court. Stout v. Broom, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 758.
Appellant filed a complaint asking the district court to nullify his dishonorable discharge from the armed forces on grounds that he was denied his “constitutional rights” of indictment by a grand jury and a trial by a petit jury. Upon motion of the United States, the complaint was dismissed. We affirm.
Appellant has failed to allege exhaustion of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ex Parte QuirinSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Whelchel v. McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Beard v. StahrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Rufus R. McCurdy Jr. v. Eugene M. Zuckert, Secretary of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- James C. Tuggle v. Harold Brown, Secretary of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hodges v. CallawayCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Alvin W. Dodson, Jr. v. Colonel Gordon N. Zelez, CommandantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Marie Von Hoffburg v. Clifford Alexander, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Hodges v. CallawayCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Sims v. FoxCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.