Lopez v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Lopez v. United States

186 F.2d 707

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 22, 1950

Docket12439

StatusPublished

Cited by20 cases

This text of 186 F.2d 707 (Lopez v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lopez v. United States, 186 F.2d 707 (9th Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate a sentence which appellant contends the District Court had no jurisdiction to impose. The motion was made pursuant to the provisions of § 2255, 28 U.S.C.A.

It was stipulated during the argument of the appeal that the appellant is not in custody under the sentence he is attacking. In fact, the said sentence has been served. Appellant is now in custody under a separate, distinct and unrelated sentence.

Upon authority of Crow v. United States, 9 Cir., 186 F.2d 704, the judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate a sentence which appellant contends the District Court had no jurisdiction to impose. The motion was made pursuant to the provisions of § 2255, 28 U.S.C.A.

It was stipulated during the argument of the appeal that the appellant is not in custody under the sentence he is attacking. In fact, the said sentence has been served. Appellant is now in custody under a separate, distinct and unrelated sentence.

Upon authority of Crow v. United States, 9 Cir., 186 F.2d 704, the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 F.2d 707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-v-united-states-ca9-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack