Slaughter v. United States

172 F.2d 281, 84 U.S. App. D.C. 232, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJanuary 17, 1949
DocketNo. 9971
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 172 F.2d 281 (Slaughter v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Slaughter v. United States, 172 F.2d 281, 84 U.S. App. D.C. 232, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695 (D.C. Cir. 1949).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

'flu: petitioner contends he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at his trial. The record of the Municipal Court shows that Mr. Thomas David entered an appearance for petitioner and does not show that he withdrew. The judgment of the Municipal Court of Appeals affirming petitioner’s conviction appears from its opinion to be based upon the premise that Mr. David was petitioner’s counsel of record at the time of trial. Slaughter v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 60 A.2d 700. But affidavits ox Mr. David and of Mr. Henry E. Rupp, Assistant Clerk of the Municipal Court, filed in this court, state that before trial Mr. David asked and received the court’s permission to withdraw as petitioner’s counsel.

Mr. Rupp’s affidavit further states that when Mr. David was permitted to withdraw, Mr. Albert Francis Graham advised the Municipal Court that he represented petitioner. But an affidavit of Mr. Graham filed in this court states that he was at no time petitioner’s counsel in this case although he represented petitioner in other cases.

We are of opinion that this case should be remanded to the Municipal Court of Appeals with directions to authorize the trial judge to supplement his statement of proceedings and evidence in this case regarding petitioner’s representation by counsel, if it be incomplete, and to, require that any such supplement be transmitted to the Municipal Court of Appeals. Thereupon the Municipal Court of Appeals should take such action in the case, either by awarding a new trial or otherwise, as it deems warranted.

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

Related

State v. LaPierre
188 A.2d 10 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1963)
Slaughter v. United States
65 A.2d 570 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
172 F.2d 281, 84 U.S. App. D.C. 232, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slaughter-v-united-states-cadc-1949.