From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Kenton

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Sep 14, 1962
308 F.2d 258 (2d Cir. 1962)

Opinion

Misc. 1962.

Submitted August 21, 1962.

Decided September 14, 1962.

Andrew G. Frederick, pro se.

Robert C. Zampano, U.S. Atty., District of Connecticut, New Haven, Conn., for respondent.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and MOORE and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges.


The petitioner has applied for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and for the assignment of counsel on his appeal from an order of the District Court for the District of Connecticut, Timbers, J., denying his petition for habeas corpus. These motions were denied below. His petition alleges that he was not permitted to bring to the attention of the Parole Board evidence which would excuse or disprove the charge of parole violation on which the revocation of parole was based. If this allegation is correct, the petitioner was, in effect, denied the "opportunity to appear before the Board" provided by 18 U.S.C. § 4207. Fleming v. Tate, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 205, 156 F.2d 848 (1946); see Escoe v. Zerbst, 295 U.S. 490, 493, 55 S.Ct. 818, 79 L.Ed. 1566 (1935).

The memorandum of decision filed in the district court is unclear as to what information was before the court when it issued its order. So far as can be gathered, however, it relied solely on the papers filed before it and now part of the record before us. These papers do not deal adequately with petitioner's contention. Accordingly, we remand to the district court for further findings and for the taking of such further testimony as may be necessary.


Summaries of

United States v. Kenton

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Sep 14, 1962
308 F.2d 258 (2d Cir. 1962)
Case details for

United States v. Kenton

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Andrew G. FREDERICK, Petitioner, v. Frank…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Sep 14, 1962

Citations

308 F.2d 258 (2d Cir. 1962)

Citing Cases

United States v. Shillitani

Furthermore, parole cannot be revoked under 18 U.S.C. § 4207 without notice of charges to the parolee and an…

Lawrence v. Smith

Even before specific due process guidelines were established in Morrissey, the Second Circuit Court of…