Ervin Kent v. United States

Eighth Circuit

Ervin Kent v. United States

450 F.2d 939

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 1, 1971

Docket71-1229

StatusPublished

This text of 450 F.2d 939 (Ervin Kent v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ervin Kent v. United States, 450 F.2d 939 (8th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole question before this Court is whether the district court correctly found that Kent had instructed his attorneys not to pursue his appeal from a criminal conviction. Recently, this Court in Davis v. United States, 441 F.2d 20 (8th Cir. 1971), decided the same question. In that case we said our task is to determine whether the district judge’s findings are clearly erroneous. Applying that standard to this case and having reviewed the record of this case, including the briefs filed in this Court, we find that the district court’s findings are substantiated by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the district court on the basis of the district court’s well reasoned opinion, 326 F.Supp. 65 (E.D.Mo.1971), and on the basis of Davis v. United States, supra.

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

PER CURIAM.

The sole question before this Court is whether the district court correctly found that Kent had instructed his attorneys not to pursue his appeal from a criminal conviction. Recently, this Court in Davis v. United States, 441 F.2d 20 (8th Cir. 1971), decided the same question. In that case we said our task is to determine whether the district judge’s findings are clearly erroneous. Applying that standard to this case and having reviewed the record of this case, including the briefs filed in this Court, we find that the district court’s findings are substantiated by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the district court on the basis of the district court’s well reasoned opinion, 326 F.Supp. 65 (E.D.Mo.1971), and on the basis of Davis v. United States, supra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

450 F.2d 939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ervin-kent-v-united-states-ca8-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack