Gandy v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Gandy v. United States

502 F.2d 564, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6526

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 11, 1974

DocketNo. 74-2538

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 502 F.2d 564 (Gandy 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

Gandy v. United States, 502 F.2d 564, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6526 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from an order of the district court denying the § 2255 petition of a federal prisoner. We vacate and remand.

The appellant was convicted upon trial by jury of two counts of selling counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 473. He was sentenced August 15, 1972, to five years under the first count and five years, subject to the provisions .of 18 U.S.C. § 4208(a)(2), under the second count, to run consecutively. On direct appeal the judgment was affirmed without opinion. United States v. Gandy, 5 Cir., 1973, 474 F.2d 1345.

In his § 2255 motion appellant attacked the validity of his conviction on grounds, inter alia, that three prior un-counselled convictions were considered by the district court in assessing sentence, in violation of United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443, 92 S.Ct. 589, 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1972). The court held that this issue had been decided adversely to appellant on direct appeal, whereas the issue presented in that appeal was the use of the prior uncounselled convictions to impeach appellant’s credibility. Thus, the court below did not treat or decide the sole issue now presented for. review.

The government has conceded that appellant was without counsel when convicted in Shelby County, Alabama, in 1948 and 1955 and Randolph County, Alabama, in 1949, and has filed a response suggesting remand. The record is silent as to the specific considerations of the sentencing judge. The district court’s judgment is, therefore, vacated and remanded for a review of the circumstances and considerations which led the court to impose sentence. If it is determined that the sentence resulted from consideration of the prior uncounselled convictions, then the court must resentence appellant without consideration being given to the same. Mitchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 1973, 482 F.2d 289; Hazeltine v. United States, 5 Cir., 1973, 486 F.2d 219.

Vacated and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from an order of the district court denying the § 2255 petition of a federal prisoner. We vacate and remand.

The appellant was convicted upon trial by jury of two counts of selling counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 473. He was sentenced August 15, 1972, to five years under the first count and five years, subject to the provisions .of 18 U.S.C. § 4208(a)(2), under the second count, to run consecutively. On direct appeal the judgment was affirmed without opinion. United States v. Gandy, 5 Cir., 1973, 474 F.2d 1345.

In his § 2255 motion appellant attacked the validity of his conviction on grounds, inter alia, that three prior un-counselled convictions were considered by the district court in assessing sentence, in violation of United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443, 92 S.Ct. 589, 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1972). The court held that this issue had been decided adversely to appellant on direct appeal, whereas the issue presented in that appeal was the use of the prior uncounselled convictions to impeach appellant’s credibility. Thus, the court below did not treat or decide the sole issue now presented for. review.

The government has conceded that appellant was without counsel when convicted in Shelby County, Alabama, in 1948 and 1955 and Randolph County, Alabama, in 1949, and has filed a response suggesting remand. The record is silent as to the specific considerations of the sentencing judge. The district court’s judgment is, therefore, vacated and remanded for a review of the circumstances and considerations which led the court to impose sentence. If it is determined that the sentence resulted from consideration of the prior uncounselled convictions, then the court must resentence appellant without consideration being given to the same. Mitchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 1973, 482 F.2d 289; Hazeltine v. United States, 5 Cir., 1973, 486 F.2d 219.

Vacated and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 F.2d 564, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gandy-v-united-states-ca5-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack