Leroy Haith v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BIGGS, Chief Judge.
Section 2255 of Title 28 U.S.C., provides inter alia: “The sentencing court shall not be required to entertain a second or successive motion for similar relief on behalf of the same prisoner.” (Emphasis added.) It was, we believe, the weight of authority prior to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963), that in determining whether or not a second application or succeeding applications for relief under Section 2255 should be entertained by the sentencing court and pertinent matters contained therein…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Townsend v. SainSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States Ex Rel. Smith v. BaldiSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Wong Doo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Leroy Haith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965
- Haith v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- LaClair v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1965
- Robert Dewey Hilbrich v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Turnbow v. BetoDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.