James M. Irby v. United States

246 F.2d 706
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedSeptember 11, 1957
Docket13610_1
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 246 F.2d 706 (James M. Irby 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 M. Irby v. United States, 246 F.2d 706 (D.C. Cir. 1957).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James M. Irby was indicted July 13, 1953, for murder in the first degree. Counsel was appointed for him July 20, 1953, and four days later he entered a plea of not guilty. October 8,1953, still represented by the same appointed counsel, Irby withdraw his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Thereupon the District Court sentenced him to imprisonment for a term of from 5 to 15 years. He has since been and is now serving the sentence. July o, 1956, Irby filed a motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which the sentencing court promptly denied. This appeal is from the order of denial.

The appellant apparently argues that he could not lawfully be sentenced on a plea, of guilty to manslaughter when he had been indicted for murder in the first degree. He says he was wrongfully deprived of a jury trial at which he could have proved that he acted in self defense; that his appointed counsel was ineffective and “railroaded” him to prison because counsel had swindled him, in a civil suit. He invokes the Fifth Amendment to protect him from the consequences of his guilty plea.

If appellant was dissatisfied with his assigned counsel because of the old grudge to which he now refers, he had ample time between the two pleas to complain of the appointment; had he done so, no doubt a substitute would have been appointed. He accepted the aid of counsel who induced the Government to accept a plea under the included offense of manslaughter rather than first degree murder. We have considered all of appellant’s arguments and conclude that his appeal is wholly lacking in merit.

Affirmed.

FAHY, Circuit Judge, concurs in the result.

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

Related

United States v. Bennie L. Peterson
483 F.2d 1222 (D.C. Circuit, 1973)
Dupin v. Commonwealth
408 S.W.2d 443 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
246 F.2d 706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-m-irby-v-united-states-cadc-1957.