From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Nenna

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 25, 1968
290 F. Supp. 42 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)

Opinion

No. 68 Civ. 3033.

September 25, 1968.

Eugene Weston, pro se.

Frank Hogan, Dist. Atty., New York County, New York City, for respondent; Edward R. Hammock, Asst. Dist. Atty., of counsel.


OPINION


The petitioner, awaiting retrial on a murder charge following reversal of his conviction by the New York State Court of Appeals, seeks his release upon a federal writ of habeas corpus. He advances various grounds, some of constitutional dimensions and others, upon their face, without substance.

On the facts presented the remedy petitioner seeks is not open to him. Section 2254 of Title 28 is inapplicable absent a judgment of the State Court. Section 2241 also is inapplicable, since the State Court before which petitioner is to be retried has jurisdiction of the crime charged and he is in lawful custody awaiting trial. In the event of conviction in the trial court and exhaustion of available remedies under New York law, petitioner, upon a claim of violation of his constitutional rights, may seek relief in the federal courts. At this point there is no basis for federal intervention.

Petitioner claims that he is unlawfully detained without bail, but it appears that his trial is scheduled for September 30. Under the circumstances, the claim is without merit. Cf. Rehman v. State of California, 85 S.Ct. 8, 13 L.Ed.2d 17 (1964) (Douglas, Cir. J.); Carbo v. United States, 82 S.Ct. 662, 7 L.Ed.2d 769 (1962) (Douglas, Cir. J.). Moreover, petitioner may seek bail in the State courts through a writ of habeas corpus. N YC.P.L.R. § 7010(b) (McKinney 1963).

The petition is dismissed.


Summaries of

United States v. Nenna

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 25, 1968
290 F. Supp. 42 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)
Case details for

United States v. Nenna

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Eugene WESTON, Petitioner, v. Albert…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Sep 25, 1968

Citations

290 F. Supp. 42 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)

Citing Cases

United States ex Rel. Hill v. Hendricks

V, 1970), which is generally applicable to habeas corpus petitions filed by persons in state custody, is not…

Lindsey v. Kruegler

Section 2254 of Title 28 is inapplicable absent a judgment of the State Court." United States ex rel. Weston…