Joseph Michael Lacaze, Charles William Acevedo, Douglas Arceneaux, and Virginia Cain v. United States
Opinion
In this ease the District Court denied the appellant’s motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 without making findings of fact and conclusions of law, as is required by the provisions of Rule 52(a), F.R.Civ.P. See Welch v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1968, 400 F.2d 582; Waters v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1968, 392 F.2d 74. Therefore the case is remanded to enable the District Court to state its findings and conclusions, and certify them to this Court by a supplemental record. The District Court may receive and consider such memoranda, briefs, or arguments with respect to the findings of fact and conclusions of law, proposed or adopted, as it deems appropriate.
Remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
427 F.2d 144 (Joseph Michael Lacaze, Charles William Acevedo, Douglas Arceneaux, and Virginia Cain v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.