Alfred D. Arellanes v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Alfred D. Arellanes v. United States

408 F.2d 1392

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 25, 1969

Docket22879

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 408 F.2d 1392 (Alfred D. Arellanes v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alfred D. Arellanes v. United States, 408 F.2d 1392 (9th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The validity of appellant’s conviction has been challenged before this court on three earlier occasions. The issues tendered to the district court in appellant’s last application under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 were encompassed in a prior petition on which a hearing was held and an order entered denying relief, which this court affirmed. Arellanes v. United States, 353 F.2d 270 (9th Cir. 1965), affirming 238 F.Supp. 546 (N.D.Cal.1964). In these circumstances, appellant was entitled to a hearing on the present motion only upon a showing that the ends of justice would be served by a redetermi-nation of the issues. See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 17, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963). Although the opinion of the district court dismissing the motion is couched largely in other terms, it left no room to doubt that it was the district court’s view that reliti-gation of the issues would not serve the ends of justice. That decision was within the district court’s discretion (see Sanders v. United States, supra, at 18, 83 S.Ct. 1068), and will not be disturbed here.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The validity of appellant’s conviction has been challenged before this court on three earlier occasions. The issues tendered to the district court in appellant’s last application under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 were encompassed in a prior petition on which a hearing was held and an order entered denying relief, which this court affirmed. Arellanes v. United States, 353 F.2d 270 (9th Cir. 1965), affirming 238 F.Supp. 546 (N.D.Cal.1964). In these circumstances, appellant was entitled to a hearing on the present motion only upon a showing that the ends of justice would be served by a redetermi-nation of the issues. See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 17, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963). Although the opinion of the district court dismissing the motion is couched largely in other terms, it left no room to doubt that it was the district court’s view that reliti-gation of the issues would not serve the ends of justice. That decision was within the district court’s discretion (see Sanders v. United States, supra, at 18, 83 S.Ct. 1068), and will not be disturbed here.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

408 F.2d 1392, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alfred-d-arellanes-v-united-states-ca9-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack