TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Price v. McGuinness

PRICE v. McGUINNESS, Warden

Price v. McGuinness, 269 F. 977 (3d Cir. 1920)
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
December 23, 1920
Docket
No. 2635
Judges
Pfr
Citations
269 F. 9771920 U.S. App. LEXIS 1931
Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Headnotes
1. Habeas corpus —Recommitments under lawful sentence held legal. Where a prisoner had applied for habeas corpus, claiming his sentence to be illegal, and had been, by the court to which he applied, twice committed to different jails for specified terms, which were within the term of the original sentence, and the original sentence was in fact lawful, the subsequent commitments were only recommitments under that sentence, and were lawful. 3. Criminal law 1216(1)—Prisoner entitled to commutation for time served in county jail under sentence to penitentiary. The time spent by a prisoner in a county jail under commitments by the District Court, to which he had applied for habeas corpus, charging his sentence to the penitentiary to bo illegal, entitles him to such commutation of time as he would have earned by serving unbroken his full form in the penitentiary. ^saFor oilier casos seo same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digeste & Indexes
Summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey; Charles F. Lynch, Judge. 7 Habeas corpus bjr Richard F. Price against Richard McGuinness, as Warden. Petition for writ denied, and petitioner appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Pfr

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PFR CURIAM.

On a plea of “guilty” Price was sentenced by the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York" to a term of 2 years and 6 months, to be served in the United States Penitentiary at Atlanta, Ga. Representing that the sentence Was imposed during his absence, and therefore invalid, Price, after commitment, succeeded by writ of habeas corpus, granted by the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Georgia, iti being returned to a.nd having his case reviewed by the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. /The latter court, on September 13, 1920, imposed what Price calls “another sentence” for an additional term of 4 months to be served at Atlanta, and later, on September 22, 1920, without setting aside the prior sentence of the same month, it imposed still “another sentence” of 4 months, to be served in the Essex county jail at Newark, N. J.

In this situation Price petitioned the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey for writ of habeas corpus, on the ground that the sentence of April 30, 1919, was illegal, because imposed when he was not present in court, or, if legal, then the later sentence for 4 months, which he is now serving, was illegal. From the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus the plaintiff took this appeal.

[1] We have given consideration to every aspect of this case, and *978 are satisfied that the sentence for 2 years and 6 months was legal, and that the subsequent acts of the court involving the appellant’s imprisonment, and termed by him “additional sentences,” were nothing more than recommitments under that sentence, and that in consequence Price is lawfully in prison.

[2] It follows, however, that, notwithstanding his commitment to Essex county jail for a part of his term, Price is entitled to such commutation of time as he would ha.ve earned under the law in serving unbroken his full term of 2 years and 6 months.

The appeal is dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1931: 11933: 11960: 219312026peak 1960 · 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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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