United States of America Ex Rel. Edgar I. Shott, Jr., Relator-appellant, v. Dan Tehan, Sheriff of Hamilton County, Respondent-appellee, 390 F.2d 185 (6th Cir. 1968)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 390 F.2d 185 (6th Cir. 1968) February 28, 1968

James G. Andrews, Jr., Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellant, John Kennedy Lynch, Cleveland, Ohio, John A. Lloyd, Jr., Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief.

Calvin W. Prem, Asst. Pros. Atty., Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellee, Melvin G. Rueger, Pros. Atty., Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief.

Before EDWARDS, CELEBREZZE and COMBS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


This is an appeal from the denial by the District Court for the Southern District of Ohio of appellant's second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Petitioner contends that when this court reversed the denial of the first petition for habeas corpus (United States ex rel. Shott v. Tehan, 337 F.2d 990 (6th Cir. 1964)) and ordered the District Court to grant same, the order entered thereunder by the District Court effectively terminated the jurisdiction of the federal courts over the petitioner. The record shows, however, that in due course of authorized appellate procedure, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in relation to this court's decision cited above and reversed same. Tehan v. United States ex rel. Shott, 382 U.S. 406, 86 S. Ct. 459, 15 L. Ed. 2d 453 (1966). This reversal nullified the effect of the prior orders of both this court and the District Court which had been entered in pursuance of the Sixth Circuit opinion. Engles v. United States ex rel. Samuels, 329 U.S. 304, 67 S. Ct. 313, 91 L. Ed. 308 (1946).

On appellant's second issue the District Court held that appellant's complaints about prejudicial publicity did not come within the rule of Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 86 S. Ct. 1507, 16 L. Ed. 2d 600 (1966). We agree.

Affirmed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.