James Edward Corbett v. United States

Fifth Circuit

James Edward Corbett v. United States

309 F.2d 140

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 17, 1962

Docket19708_1

StatusPublished

This text of 309 F.2d 140 (James Edward Corbett 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

James Edward Corbett v. United States, 309 F.2d 140 (5th Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James Edward Corbett has appealed from an order of the district court denying his motion to vacate and set aside a judgment and sentence imposed upon him. The appellant’s motion was made pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The ground upon which relief was sought was that the appellant was mentally incompetent at the time of his trial which resulted in the sentence imposed upon him. The district court appointed counsel, arranged for the presence of the appellant, and received the testimony of several psychiatrists. Based upon this testimony, the court found that there was nothing upon which a finding could be based that appellant was anything other than mentally competent at the time of his trial and sentence. Our examination of the entire record, including the evidence adduced before the district court, leads us to the conclusion that no determination could have been reached other than that pronounced by the district court. Its order denying the motion is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

James Edward Corbett has appealed from an order of the district court denying his motion to vacate and set aside a judgment and sentence imposed upon him. The appellant’s motion was made pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The ground upon which relief was sought was that the appellant was mentally incompetent at the time of his trial which resulted in the sentence imposed upon him. The district court appointed counsel, arranged for the presence of the appellant, and received the testimony of several psychiatrists. Based upon this testimony, the court found that there was nothing upon which a finding could be based that appellant was anything other than mentally competent at the time of his trial and sentence. Our examination of the entire record, including the evidence adduced before the district court, leads us to the conclusion that no determination could have been reached other than that pronounced by the district court. Its order denying the motion is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 F.2d 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-edward-corbett-v-united-states-ca5-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack