TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Donald Bowman v. Relph W. Alvis, Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary

Donald BOWMAN, Appellant, v. Ralph W. ALVIS, Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary, Appellee

Bowman v. Relph W. Alvis,, Ohio State Penitentiary, 224 F.2d 275 (6th Cir. 1955)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 10, 1955
Docket
No. 12442_1
Judges
Martin, Miller, Per Curiam, Stewart
Citations
224 F.2d 27571 Ohio Law. Abs. 52457 Ohio Op. 4241955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4070

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

In this case, Donald Bowman, a convict now confined in the Ohio State Penitentiary, has appealed from an order entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio denying his petition for habeas corpus. He has filed in this court numerous petitions, motions, briefs, and various assorted documents, including his application to the Governor of Ohio for pardon.

All the pléadings, documents, and communications which appellant-petitioner has presented have been duly considered and found to be without merit in support of his appeal. This court previously has held that appellant had exhausted all his state remedies and was, therefore, entitled to a hearing in the United States District Court on his application for habeas corpus. District Judge Cecil accorded him the benefit of a fair and adequate hearing, following which findings of fact and. conclusions of law were appropriately filed by the judge, wherein the conclusion was reached that appellant had been properly tried, convicted and sentenced in the Common Pleas Court of Richland County, Ohio; and that, in habeas corpus proceedings, the United States District Court determines only the question of legality of confinement and does not consider whether or not there were errors committed in the original trial of the case. , .

On this appeal, it appears that appellant actually is seeking a remedy which could have been sought only by direct appeal. This embraces the proposition that he was convicted upon evidence erroneously admitted, This court and other federal courts- have held many times that application for habeas corpus may not be employed in lieu of an appropriate review by writ of error or appeal. See Goss v. United States, 6 Cir., 179 F.2d 706 . This principle is so well settled as to require no citation of authority.

In our opinion, the judgment of the district court should be affirmed and the appeal dismissed; and it is- so ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1957: 11959: 11960: 11969: 219572026peak 1969 · 2

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Goss v. United States, 179 F.2d 706 (6th Cir. 1949) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list