TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McMILLAN v. PARKER

Robert L. McMillan v. J. J. Parker, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pa., Chairman, U.S. Board of Parole, Washington, D.C., and Mr. Faulkner, U.S. Probation Officer, Baltimore, Md

McMILLAN v. Parker, 378 F.2d 444 (3d Cir. 1967)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 6, 1967
Docket
No. 16046
Citations
378 F.2d 4441967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6104

Opinion

378 F.2d 444

Robert L. McMILLAN, Appellant, v. J. J. PARKER, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pa., Chairman, U.S. Board of Parole, Washington, D.C., and Mr. Faulkner, U.S. Probation Officer, Baltimore, Md.

No. 16046.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Submitted May 23, 1967. Decided June 6, 1967.

Robert L. McMillan, pro se.

Harry A. Nagle, Lewisburg, Pa., Bernard J. Brown, U.S. Atty., for appellees.

Before STALEY, Chief Judge, and KALODNER and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

1

This is an appeal from a denial of appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant was convicted of bank robbery and sentenced for a period of fifteen years on April 24, 1953. He was released on parole on March 31, 1962. He was free on parole for more than three and one-half years before he was arrested and recommitted for a parole violation. He maintains that he may not be detained beyond the original expiration date of his sentence; 1 he contends that he must be given credit for the time he was on parole.

2

The district court properly concluded that the parole statute, 18 U.S.C. 4205, prohibits the diminution of the time remaining to be served by the time the prisoner was on parole and that his constitutional claim was without merit. 2 See Smith v. Blackwell, 367 F.2d 539 (C.A.5, 1966); Weathers v. Willingham, 356 F.2d 421 (C.A.10, 1966).

3

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

1

There would appear to be a question of prematurity involved here, but the parties have not discussed it. The simplicity of the substantive issues renders unnecessary our consideration of that problem 2

The district court's opinion has been published, 254 F.Supp. 365 (M.D.Pa., 1966)

How later courts describe this case

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

1988: 119882026peak 1988 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kelley v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles762 P.2d 121 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988)

Most recent

  1. Kelley v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles762 P.2d 121 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988)

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 3

DepthCaseCited by
Smith v. Olin G. Blackwell,, United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Ga., 367 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1966) 39
Weathers v. J. T. Willingham,, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kan., 356 F.2d 421 (10th Cir. 1966) 22
McMillan v. Parker, 254 F. Supp. 365 (M.D. Penn. 1966) 6

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