Joe Delegal v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Joe Delegal v. United States

271 F.2d 279, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3210

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 27, 1959

Docket17725_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 271 F.2d 279 (Joe Delegal 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

Joe Delegal v. United States, 271 F.2d 279, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3210 (5th Cir. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a denial by the District Court of a motion under F.R.Crim.P. 32(d), 18 U.S.C.A., to set aside a sentence of imprisonment and a prior plea of guilty to a one-count in *280 dictment charging violation of 26 U.S.C. A. § 5008(b) (1) (1955). The only basis for the motion was that at the time of the entry of the plea of guilty the defendant, appellant here, was not personally present in court and the plea had been entered by his counsel without his knowledge or full consent. The District Judge heard the evidence and found that both at the time of the entry of the plea, November 10, 1958, and at the time of sentence, February 11, 1959, appellant and his counsel were present in court and the plea was knowingly made. Withdrawal of a plea of guilty is committed to the sound discretion of the District Court and no abuse of it is shown here. Williams v. United States, 5 Cir., 1951, 192 F.2d 39; Mitchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 1950, 179 F.2d 305.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a denial by the District Court of a motion under F.R.Crim.P. 32(d), 18 U.S.C.A., to set aside a sentence of imprisonment and a prior plea of guilty to a one-count in *280 dictment charging violation of 26 U.S.C. A. § 5008(b) (1) (1955). The only basis for the motion was that at the time of the entry of the plea of guilty the defendant, appellant here, was not personally present in court and the plea had been entered by his counsel without his knowledge or full consent. The District Judge heard the evidence and found that both at the time of the entry of the plea, November 10, 1958, and at the time of sentence, February 11, 1959, appellant and his counsel were present in court and the plea was knowingly made. Withdrawal of a plea of guilty is committed to the sound discretion of the District Court and no abuse of it is shown here. Williams v. United States, 5 Cir., 1951, 192 F.2d 39; Mitchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 1950, 179 F.2d 305.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 F.2d 279, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joe-delegal-v-united-states-ca5-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack