Alred v. United States

177 F.2d 193, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 3158
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 4, 1949
DocketNo. 5967
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 177 F.2d 193 (Alred v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alred v. United States, 177 F.2d 193, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 3158 (4th Cir. 1949).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion made under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate sentences of imprisonment imposed upon one William Edward Aired on pleas of guilty to indictments charging bank robbery, conspiracy to rob a bank, violation of the National Motor Vehicle-Theft Act, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2311-2313, and violation of the Federal Firearms Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 901 et seq., and a plea of nolo contendere to an indictment charging violation of the National Stolen Property Act, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2311, 2314-2317. The motion was entirely without merit and was [194]*194properly denied. Aired was represented by competent counsel upon the entry of the pleas and was not denied any constitutional right. He may not have the sentences entered against him set aside and his case tried over by claiming that the attorney whom he selected did not properly represent him. Crowe v. United States, 4 Cir., 175 F.2d 799. In addition to this, both the judge below, on the motion from which appeal is taken, and Judge Underwood, on a petition for habeas corpus, have fully investigated the charges made by the prisoner against his attorney and have found them utterly lacking in merit. An examination of the record convinces us that these findings are correct

Affirmed.

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

Related

George Blomgren Dewey v. United States
268 F.2d 124 (Eighth Circuit, 1959)
Baldwin v. United States
141 F. Supp. 310 (E.D. South Carolina, 1956)
United States v. Meyers
139 F. Supp. 724 (D. Alaska, 1956)
Thomas Nelson Arthur v. United States
230 F.2d 666 (Fifth Circuit, 1956)
Isaac Barber v. United States
227 F.2d 431 (Tenth Circuit, 1955)
Charles Kimbrough v. United States
226 F.2d 485 (Fifth Circuit, 1955)
Joseph Stern v. United States
219 F.2d 263 (Fourth Circuit, 1955)
Simeone v. Humphrey
114 F. Supp. 573 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1953)
Ridgeway v. United States
205 F.2d 680 (Sixth Circuit, 1953)
United States v. Pisciotta
199 F.2d 603 (Second Circuit, 1952)
Wheatley v. United States
198 F.2d 325 (Tenth Circuit, 1952)
Bowen v. United States
192 F.2d 515 (Fifth Circuit, 1951)
Hayman v. United States
187 F.2d 456 (Ninth Circuit, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
177 F.2d 193, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 3158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alred-v-united-states-ca4-1949.