J. D. Hoard v. A. L. Dutton, Acting Warden, Georgia State Prison
This text of 360 F.2d 673 (J. D. Hoard v. A. L. Dutton, Acting Warden, Georgia State Prison) 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.
Opinion
This is an appeal from denial of a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant, a Georgia state convict, is presently serving three, thirty-year concurrent sentences for three offenses of sodomy. Appellant asserts on appeal essentially the same contentions argued in the lower court: that he was denied effective assistance of counsel and that the sentences imposed constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
This court recently set forth standards for determining the question *674 of adequacy of counsel. See Williams v. Beto, 354 F.2d 698 (5th Cir. 1965). A careful review of the record, particularly the testimony of the lawyer who represented appellant, and the principles enunciated in that ease persuades us that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel.
The sentences imposed in the instant case are within the statutory limitation. Appellate courts do not revise sentences within the limits set by statute, except in the most exceptional circumstances. See United States v. Martell, 335 F.2d 764 (4th Cir. 1964). Such circumstances clearly are not present here.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
360 F.2d 673, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-d-hoard-v-a-l-dutton-acting-warden-georgia-state-prison-ca5-1966.