TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

George J. Henderson v. Alwynn Cronvich

George J. HENDERSON, Appellant, v. Alwynn CRONVICH, Appellee

Henderson v. Alwynn Cronvich, 402 F.2d 763 (5th Cir. 1968)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 4, 1968
Docket
No. 25605_1
Judges
Coleman, Hunter, Morgan, Per Curiam
Citations
402 F.2d 7631968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5011

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Under Louisiana law a defendant may be prosecuted by information for an offense less than capital.

1

In capital cases an indictment is prerequisite.

The appellant, in state custody under an information for an offense less than capital, unsuccessfully sought relief by habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. He contended there, and he argues here, that the provision of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which prohibits prosecution for infamous crimes except on the indictment of a Grand Jury applies to the states under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; therefore his detention upon a bill of information rather than an indictment violates his federal constitutional rights.

In Hurtado v. People of State of California, 2

and again in Gaines v. State of Washington, 3

the Supreme Court has held that the indictment clause of the Fifth Amendment does not apply to the states. In the absence of some clear indication that the Supreme Court would no longer follow these precedents we are, of course, bound to follow them. As recently as 1964 the Tenth Circuit in Blakesley v. Crouse, 4

and as recently as 1965 the Sixth Circuit in Saunders v. Buckhoe, 5

followed the rule announced in Hurtado and Gaines.

We therefore hold that the Louisiana procedure is not constitutionally invalid and we affirm the judgment of the District Court.

Affirmed.

1

. Article I, § 9, Louisiana Constitution; Article 382, Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure.

2

. 110 U.S. 516 , 4 S.Ct. 111, 292 , 28 L.Ed. 232 (1884).

3

. 277 U.S. 81 , 48 S.Ct. 468 , 72 L.Ed. 793 (1928).

4

. 332 F.2d 849 .

5

. 346 F.2d 558 .

How later courts describe this case

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

1970: 11971: 21973: 11984: 219702026peak 1971 · 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 4

DepthCaseCited by
Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884) 1,239
Gaines v. Washington, 277 U.S. 81 (1928) 147
Blakesley v. Crouse, 332 F.2d 849 (10th Cir. 1964) 10
Saunders v. Raymond J. Buckhoe,, State House of Corr. & Branch Prison, Marquette, Mich., 346 F.2d 558 (6th Cir. 1965) 5

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