James Waddell v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden, Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary

Fifth Circuit

James Waddell v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden, Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary

457 F.2d 944, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10379

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 30, 1972

Docket71-3275

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 457 F.2d 944 (James Waddell v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden, Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary) 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 Waddell v. Noah L. Alldredge, Warden, Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary, 457 F.2d 944, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10379 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The sole issue to be determined upon this appeal is whether the district court erroneously found that Appellant Waddell was not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the basis of his contention that his sentencing court failed to advise him of his right to appeal his conviction in forma pauperis, after entry of his plea of guilty. 1

As the court below correctly held, Rule 32(a) (2), F.R.Cr.P., requires a federal district court to advise the defendant of his right to appeal without cost only in eases where the defendant has been convicted upon a plea of not guilty. Since Waddell did not enter a plea of not guilty, nor has he intimated that his guilty plea is in any way invalid, he is clearly not entitled to the relief he seeks. Barber v. United States, 10th Cir. 1970, 427 F.2d 70, cert. denied 1970, 400 U.S. 867, 91 S.Ct. 108, 27 L.Ed.2d 106; Baker v. United States, 10th Cir. 1968, 404 F.2d 787; Boyes v. United States, 5th Cir. 1965, 354 F.2d 31.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

1

. It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court’s local Rule 9(c) (2), appellant having failed to file a brief -within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981.

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

PER CURIAM:

The sole issue to be determined upon this appeal is whether the district court erroneously found that Appellant Waddell was not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the basis of his contention that his sentencing court failed to advise him of his right to appeal his conviction in forma pauperis, after entry of his plea of guilty. 1

As the court below correctly held, Rule 32(a) (2), F.R.Cr.P., requires a federal district court to advise the defendant of his right to appeal without cost only in eases where the defendant has been convicted upon a plea of not guilty. Since Waddell did not enter a plea of not guilty, nor has he intimated that his guilty plea is in any way invalid, he is clearly not entitled to the relief he seeks. Barber v. United States, 10th Cir. 1970, 427 F.2d 70, cert. denied 1970, 400 U.S. 867, 91 S.Ct. 108, 27 L.Ed.2d 106; Baker v. United States, 10th Cir. 1968, 404 F.2d 787; Boyes v. United States, 5th Cir. 1965, 354 F.2d 31.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

1

. It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court’s local Rule 9(c) (2), appellant having failed to file a brief -within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

457 F.2d 944, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-waddell-v-noah-l-alldredge-warden-lewisburg-federal-penitentiary-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack