Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States

339 F.2d 702
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 22, 1965
Docket7864_1
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 339 F.2d 702 (Alfonso Juan Alire v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
339 F.2d 702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alfonso-juan-alire-v-united-states-ca10-1965.