Robert E. McCaffrey v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Robert E. McCaffrey v. United States

328 F.2d 606, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6260

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 25, 1964

Docket21051_1

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 328 F.2d 606 (Robert E. McCaffrey 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

Robert E. McCaffrey v. United States, 328 F.2d 606, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6260 (5th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from denial of a motion to vacate judgment of conviction under § 2255 raises two contentions. The first is that there was no intelligent and effective waiver of counsel. The record is plain. The appellant expressly stated that he did not wish to have counsel. He pleaded guilty and, upon interrogation, reiterated his desire to plead. There is no merit in this contention.

The second ground of appeal is the claim that the motion should not have been denied without a hearing because of his allegation that he was incompetent mentally and physically to waive counsel or enter the guilty plea. The difficulty with this is that appellant does not allege specifically or categorically that he was incompetent or otherwise incapacitated to such a degree that he did not intelligently waive the right to counsel. He skirts all around the subject, but the petition simply does not allege this fact.

There was no error in the order of the trial court denying relief.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from denial of a motion to vacate judgment of conviction under § 2255 raises two contentions. The first is that there was no intelligent and effective waiver of counsel. The record is plain. The appellant expressly stated that he did not wish to have counsel. He pleaded guilty and, upon interrogation, reiterated his desire to plead. There is no merit in this contention.

The second ground of appeal is the claim that the motion should not have been denied without a hearing because of his allegation that he was incompetent mentally and physically to waive counsel or enter the guilty plea. The difficulty with this is that appellant does not allege specifically or categorically that he was incompetent or otherwise incapacitated to such a degree that he did not intelligently waive the right to counsel. He skirts all around the subject, but the petition simply does not allege this fact.

There was no error in the order of the trial court denying relief.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

328 F.2d 606, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-e-mccaffrey-v-united-states-ca5-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack