Cleveland v. Sanford

Fifth Circuit

Cleveland v. Sanford

103 F.2d 887, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3689

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 11, 1939

DocketNo. 8999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 103 F.2d 887 (Cleveland v. Sanford) 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

Cleveland v. Sanford, 103 F.2d 887, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3689 (5th Cir. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal .from a judgment denying a writ o'f habeas corpus and remanding appellant to the custody of the warden of the Atlanta Penitentiary.

The record discloses that appellant pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him in four counts with mailing obscene literature in violation of Title 18 U.S.Code, § 334, 18 U.S.C.A. § 334. A cumulative sentence of 15 years imprisonment was imposed. Appellant complains that the sentence was excessive and that he was deprived of the advice of counsel when entering his plea of guilty. He relies upon Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 459, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461. On the facts disclosed by the record that decision is not in point. While it is apparent that appellant was given an excessively severe sentence that is a question that addresses itself to the Executive, on an application for commutation of sentence or pardon. The seeming injustice is not within our province to correct.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal .from a judgment denying a writ o'f habeas corpus and remanding appellant to the custody of the warden of the Atlanta Penitentiary.

The record discloses that appellant pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him in four counts with mailing obscene literature in violation of Title 18 U.S.Code, § 334, 18 U.S.C.A. § 334. A cumulative sentence of 15 years imprisonment was imposed. Appellant complains that the sentence was excessive and that he was deprived of the advice of counsel when entering his plea of guilty. He relies upon Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 459, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461. On the facts disclosed by the record that decision is not in point. While it is apparent that appellant was given an excessively severe sentence that is a question that addresses itself to the Executive, on an application for commutation of sentence or pardon. The seeming injustice is not within our province to correct.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 F.2d 887, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cleveland-v-sanford-ca5-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack