Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States

339 F.2d 702
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided January 22, 1965·No. 7864_1·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court denied appellant’s .petition for coram nobis without a hearing. Appellant was charged with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, found guilty by a jury, and sentenced to a 3-year term. On appeal his conviction was affirmed (Alire v. United States, 10 Cir., 313 F.2d 31) and certiorari was denied, 373 U.S. 943, 83 S.Ct. 1554, 10 L.Ed.2d 699. He elected not to commence serving his federal term and at present he is confined in the Colorado State Penitentiary.

In United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 511, 74 S.Ct. 247, 252, 98 L.Ed. 248, the United States Supreme Court said that the extraordinary remedy of coram nobis should be allowed “only under circumstances compelling such action to achieve justice.” United States v. Mayer, 235 U.S. 55, 69, 35 S.Ct. 16, 19, 59 L.Ed. 129, speaks of the use of coram nobis for the vacation of a judgment as existing “in those cases where the errors were of the most fundamental character; that is, such as rendered the proceeding itself irregular and invalid.”

The petitioner asserts as grounds for relief the lack of preparation of his counsel for trial and the denial by the court of a motion for continuance made just prior to trial. As to the first we note that appellant was sufficiently satisfied with his counsel to permit him to handle the direct appeal from the conviction; and as to the second no allegations are made to sustain any claim of abuse of discretion. In our opinion no compelling circumstances are shown for the use of the extraordinary writ of coram nobis.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States, 339 F.2d 702 (10th Cir. 1965).

339 F.2d 702 (Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States
365 F.2d 278 (Tenth Circuit, 1966)
Berl Estes McDonald v. United States
356 F.2d 980 (Tenth Circuit, 1966)