Cecal Bell v. State of Alabama

Fifth Circuit

Cecal Bell v. State of Alabama

391 F.2d 286

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 1968

Docket25340

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 391 F.2d 286 (Cecal Bell v. State of Alabama) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cecal Bell v. State of Alabama, 391 F.2d 286 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal has been taken from the district court’s denial of habeas corpus to an Alabama prisoner presently serving five sentences, which total twenty-five years, for five separate offenses of cattle theft.

Pursuant to this Court’s order of September 29, 1966, in Bell v. State of Alabama, 5 Cir. 1966, 367 F.2d 243, the district court held an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s contentions that a written confession had been coerced from him and that he had had ineffective assistance of counsel.

From a review of the record including the transcript of the evidentiary hearing, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error in these findings. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal has been taken from the district court’s denial of habeas corpus to an Alabama prisoner presently serving five sentences, which total twenty-five years, for five separate offenses of cattle theft.

Pursuant to this Court’s order of September 29, 1966, in Bell v. State of Alabama, 5 Cir. 1966, 367 F.2d 243, the district court held an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s contentions that a written confession had been coerced from him and that he had had ineffective assistance of counsel.

From a review of the record including the transcript of the evidentiary hearing, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error in these findings. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 F.2d 286, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cecal-bell-v-state-of-alabama-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack