Katz v. United States

Sixth Circuit

Katz v. United States

161 F.2d 869, 1947 U.S. App. LEXIS 2845

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedApril 7, 1947

DocketNo. 10318

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 161 F.2d 869 (Katz v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Katz v. United States, 161 F.2d 869, 1947 U.S. App. LEXIS 2845 (6th Cir. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered by the Court on the record, briefs and oral arg'uments of counsel for respective parties;

And it appearing that appellant on April 3, 1946, being represented by counsel of his own choosing, freely and voluntarily and without inducement on the part of the ap-pellee, entered a plea of guilty to the indictment herein, and thereafter requested that he be placed on probation, and that his present motion to withdraw the plea of guilty was not filed until May 15, 1946 subsequent to decision by the Court on May 6, 1946 that a sentence of ten months would he imposed without granting probation;

And the relief sought being one resting in the sound discretion of the trial judge, and to which the appellant is not entitled as a matter of right; see Kercheval v. United States, 274 U.S. 220, 224, 47 S.Ct. 582, 71 L.Ed. 1009; and the Court being of the opinion that the ruling of the trial Judge in overruling appellant’s motion was not an abuse of such discretion. Compare United States v. Colonna, 3 Cir., 142 F.2d 210;

It is now ordered that the order of the District Court denying appellant’s motion to vacate and set aside the plea of guilty is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered by the Court on the record, briefs and oral arg'uments of counsel for respective parties;

And it appearing that appellant on April 3, 1946, being represented by counsel of his own choosing, freely and voluntarily and without inducement on the part of the ap-pellee, entered a plea of guilty to the indictment herein, and thereafter requested that he be placed on probation, and that his present motion to withdraw the plea of guilty was not filed until May 15, 1946 subsequent to decision by the Court on May 6, 1946 that a sentence of ten months would he imposed without granting probation;

And the relief sought being one resting in the sound discretion of the trial judge, and to which the appellant is not entitled as a matter of right; see Kercheval v. United States, 274 U.S. 220, 224, 47 S.Ct. 582, 71 L.Ed. 1009; and the Court being of the opinion that the ruling of the trial Judge in overruling appellant’s motion was not an abuse of such discretion. Compare United States v. Colonna, 3 Cir., 142 F.2d 210;

It is now ordered that the order of the District Court denying appellant’s motion to vacate and set aside the plea of guilty is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 F.2d 869, 1947 U.S. App. LEXIS 2845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katz-v-united-states-ca6-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack