James F. Hanley v. United States

222 F.2d 566, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 400, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3856
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedMay 19, 1955
Docket12525
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 222 F.2d 566 (James F. Hanley v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
James F. Hanley v. United States, 222 F.2d 566, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 400, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3856 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Indicted in two counts charging respectively housebreaking and grand larceny, James F. Hanley was found guilty of both offenses by a jury in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He was sentenced to imprisonment for from four to twelve years on the housebreaking count, and to a term of one year on the larceny charge, the sentences to run concurrently. He did not appeal. Some nine months after the sentences were pronounced, Hanley filed a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, asserting the trial judge should have sua sponte directed an acquittal on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction of such offenses. Cf. Rule 29(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C. This appeal is from the order which denied the motion.

A question as to the sufficiency of the proofs at the trial in which the prisoner was convicted cannot be raised by a motion to vacate under § 2255. Finan v. United States, 4 Cir., 1949, 177 F.2d 850.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Joseph M. Brule v. United States
240 F.2d 589 (Ninth Circuit, 1957)
Roland Hall v. United States
235 F.2d 838 (D.C. Circuit, 1956)
Samuel Wrightson v. United States
222 F.2d 556 (D.C. Circuit, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 F.2d 566, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 400, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-f-hanley-v-united-states-cadc-1955.