Robert D. Phelps v. United States

Tenth Circuit

Robert D. Phelps v. United States

335 F.2d 547

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedAugust 4, 1964

Docket7765_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 335 F.2d 547 (Robert D. Phelps v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robert D. Phelps v. United States, 335 F.2d 547 (10th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant is presently serving a sentence imposed upon him after being found guilty of entering a federally insured bank with intent to commit larceny in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). By motion filed under 28 U.S.C § 2255 he now seeks to attack the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction, asserts error in the court’s instructions to the jury and claims error and prejudice from designated questions asked by the trial court during the course of the trial. He also contends he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the trial. The trial court denied relief.

We affirm the judgment. Our review of the record indicates appellant received adequate representation from counsel. His remaining contentions pertain only to claimed trial errors and are not properly raised under section 2255. Carrillo v. United States, 10 Cir., 332 F. 2d 202; Johnston v. United States, 10 Cir., 331 F.2d 997; Fennell v. United States, 10 Cir., 313 F.2d 941.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant is presently serving a sentence imposed upon him after being found guilty of entering a federally insured bank with intent to commit larceny in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). By motion filed under 28 U.S.C § 2255 he now seeks to attack the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction, asserts error in the court’s instructions to the jury and claims error and prejudice from designated questions asked by the trial court during the course of the trial. He also contends he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the trial. The trial court denied relief.

We affirm the judgment. Our review of the record indicates appellant received adequate representation from counsel. His remaining contentions pertain only to claimed trial errors and are not properly raised under section 2255. Carrillo v. United States, 10 Cir., 332 F. 2d 202; Johnston v. United States, 10 Cir., 331 F.2d 997; Fennell v. United States, 10 Cir., 313 F.2d 941.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

335 F.2d 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-d-phelps-v-united-states-ca10-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack