H. E. Juelich v. United States

475 F.2d 788
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 22, 1973·No. 72-3530·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner, Herbert E. Juelich, appeals from the District Court’s denial of his motion to vacate sentence, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We find that' petitioner’s contention, that his constitutional right to due process was denied when evidence stemming directly from an “illegal” autopsy was admitted at his trial, was considered and ruled upon in 1963 at an evidentiary hearing held pursuant to an earlier § 2255 motion. At that time, the District Judge rejected petitioner’s contention, and we affirmed, Juelich v. United States, 5 Cir. 1965, 342 F.2d 29, 31. 1 The District Court correctly rejected petitioner’s motion without holding an evidentiary hearing because petitioner is seeking relief previously sought under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the same grounds previously raised and decided against him. Dryden v. United States, 5 Cir. 1972, 455 F.2d 491; Owens v. United States, 5 Cir. 1970, 430 F.2d 1173. We affirm.

Affirmed.

1

. See the quotation from the transcript of the 1963 evidentiary hearing in Juelich v. United States, 5 Cir. 1968, 403 F.2d 523. 525.

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

H. E. Juelich v. United States, 475 F.2d 788 (5th Cir. 1973).

475 F.2d 788 (H. E. Juelich v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Herbert E. Juelich v. United States
342 F.2d 29 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
Herbert E. Juelich v. United States
403 F.2d 523 (Fifth Circuit, 1968)
Max Jerome Owens v. United States
430 F.2d 1173 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)
William Fred Dryden v. United States
455 F.2d 491 (Fifth Circuit, 1972)