Harold Grossnickle v. State of Alabama
Harold GROSSNICKLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent-Appellee
Opinion
*865 PER CURIAM.
It is ordered that the motion filed by appellee to dismiss the appeal, in the above styled and numbered cause, is hereby granted.
At most, this appeal questions the method of determination used and the result reached thereby by Alabama prison authorities and Alabama courts in computing the time to be served by petitioner under an Alabama state sentence. We must leave such decisions to the courts of Alabama. They present no federal question, constitutional or otherwise, and are not subject to review by federal ha-beas corpus proceedings. Cf. United States ex rel. Kennedy v. Tyler, 269 U.S. 13 , 46 S.Ct. 1 , 70 L.Ed. 138 (1925); Young v. Eidson, 8 Cir. 1954, 217 F.2d 158 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.