Edward Earle Beck v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Edward Earle Beck v. United States

367 F.2d 865

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 28, 1966

Docket21379_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 367 F.2d 865 (Edward Earle Beck v. United States) 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

Edward Earle Beck v. United States, 367 F.2d 865 (5th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The consideration of this appeal leaves this Court with the firm conviction that the appellant did not receive a fair trial. Since the fundamental errors will not recur upon another trial, no useful purpose would be served by a discussion of them. So that a new trial may be had, the order of the district court denying the appellant’s motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 will be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to vacate the judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant. It appears that the district court was without jurisdiction to enter any order denying appellant’s motion under Rule 33, Fed.Rules Crim. Proc. 18 U.S.C.A. and the appeal from that portion of the district court’s order is dismissed. That portion of the order denying the Section 2255 motion is

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

The consideration of this appeal leaves this Court with the firm conviction that the appellant did not receive a fair trial. Since the fundamental errors will not recur upon another trial, no useful purpose would be served by a discussion of them. So that a new trial may be had, the order of the district court denying the appellant’s motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 will be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to vacate the judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant. It appears that the district court was without jurisdiction to enter any order denying appellant’s motion under Rule 33, Fed.Rules Crim. Proc. 18 U.S.C.A. and the appeal from that portion of the district court’s order is dismissed. That portion of the order denying the Section 2255 motion is

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

367 F.2d 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-earle-beck-v-united-states-ca5-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack