Hilliard Sanders v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Hilliard Sanders v. United States

230 F.2d 127

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 1956

Docket7125

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 230 F.2d 127 (Hilliard Sanders v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hilliard Sanders v. United States, 230 F.2d 127 (4th Cir. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition to vacate and set aside under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 the judgment and sentence of imprisonment which was affirmed by this court in Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 127 F.2d 647; Id., 317 U.S. 626, 63 S.Ct. 37, 87 L.Ed. 506. A similar motion was heard by the District Court in 1950, 92 F.Supp. 447, and the action of the court in denying same had been affirmed by this court. Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 183 F.2d 748. Appellant was represented in the trial court by counsel of his own choosing and employment and, as this court held on his appeal, was properly convicted of the crime charged against him, notwithstanding his defense of alibi. The statute upon which he bases his motion may not be used to retry the case or to raise questions which might have been raised upon appeal. There is nothing to the contrary in United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205, 72 S.Ct. 263, 96 L.Ed. 232 or United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248 upon which appellant relies. Nothing need be added to the opinion filed by the District Judge in entering the order from which this appeal is taken. See 138 F.Supp. 192.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition to vacate and set aside under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 the judgment and sentence of imprisonment which was affirmed by this court in Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 127 F.2d 647; Id., 317 U.S. 626, 63 S.Ct. 37, 87 L.Ed. 506. A similar motion was heard by the District Court in 1950, 92 F.Supp. 447, and the action of the court in denying same had been affirmed by this court. Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 183 F.2d 748. Appellant was represented in the trial court by counsel of his own choosing and employment and, as this court held on his appeal, was properly convicted of the crime charged against him, notwithstanding his defense of alibi. The statute upon which he bases his motion may not be used to retry the case or to raise questions which might have been raised upon appeal. There is nothing to the contrary in United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205, 72 S.Ct. 263, 96 L.Ed. 232 or United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248 upon which appellant relies. Nothing need be added to the opinion filed by the District Judge in entering the order from which this appeal is taken. See 138 F.Supp. 192.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 F.2d 127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hilliard-sanders-v-united-states-ca4-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack