L. C. Green v. United States

Fifth Circuit

L. C. Green v. United States

460 F.2d 317, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9302

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 30, 1972

Docket72-1364

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 460 F.2d 317 (L. C. Green 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

L. C. Green v. United States, 460 F.2d 317, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9302 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Green filed two motions to vacate judgment and sentence in the district court on the same date, both of which were denied for lack of merit. Finding no error in the rulings below, we affirm.

In one of the § 2255 motions, he contended that his conviction for theft from an interstate shipment was invalid because he was arrested on the basis of a warrant lacking a proper supporting affidavit. The identical argument was presented in his other motion, wherein he sought to have his convictions for transporting and receiving or concealing a stolen motor vehicle set aside.

As the district court correctly held, even if the arrest warrants were defective, Green has shown no prejudice emanating from the arrests inasmuch as no incriminating statements were made, nor was any property seized at the time of the arrest, which was used in evidence against him. Thus, he is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Davis v. United States, 5th Cir. 1970, 424 F.2d 1061, cert. denied 1970, 400 U.S. 836, 91 S.Ct. 72, 27 L.Ed.2d 68; Barber v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 775; Abraham v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1969, 407 F.2d 826.

The judgments appealed from are affirmed,

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Green filed two motions to vacate judgment and sentence in the district court on the same date, both of which were denied for lack of merit. Finding no error in the rulings below, we affirm.

In one of the § 2255 motions, he contended that his conviction for theft from an interstate shipment was invalid because he was arrested on the basis of a warrant lacking a proper supporting affidavit. The identical argument was presented in his other motion, wherein he sought to have his convictions for transporting and receiving or concealing a stolen motor vehicle set aside.

As the district court correctly held, even if the arrest warrants were defective, Green has shown no prejudice emanating from the arrests inasmuch as no incriminating statements were made, nor was any property seized at the time of the arrest, which was used in evidence against him. Thus, he is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Davis v. United States, 5th Cir. 1970, 424 F.2d 1061, cert. denied 1970, 400 U.S. 836, 91 S.Ct. 72, 27 L.Ed.2d 68; Barber v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 775; Abraham v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1969, 407 F.2d 826.

The judgments appealed from are affirmed,

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

460 F.2d 317, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/l-c-green-v-united-states-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack