United States v. Arthur L. Johnson

Third Circuit

United States v. Arthur L. Johnson

359 F.2d 845, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6299

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 3, 1966

Docket15746

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 359 F.2d 845 (United States v. Arthur L. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Arthur L. Johnson, 359 F.2d 845, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6299 (3d Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an Order of the District Court of New Jersey denying the appellant’s “Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis” which was treated as an application under Section 2255, Title 28, U.S.C.A., to vacate and set aside the sentence imposed following a plea of guilty on an indictment charging passing, possessing and uttering counterfeit money. The petition below was premised on the contention that the appellant was not advised of his right to counsel. The District Court found after hearing and consideration of the proceedings at the arraignment that the appellant “was fully apprised of his right to counsel and was, in fact, offered counsel by the presiding judge.” That finding is amply sustained.

The appellant for the first time here makes the further contention that he was induced to plead guilty by inducement of Government agents. With respect to that contention it need only be said that it is settled that “Questions cannot be presented on appeal that have not first been determined by the District Court, from which the appeal is taken.” Bush v. United States, 347 F.2d 231, 232 (6 Cir. 1965).

The Order of the District Court will be 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 of the District Court of New Jersey denying the appellant’s “Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis” which was treated as an application under Section 2255, Title 28, U.S.C.A., to vacate and set aside the sentence imposed following a plea of guilty on an indictment charging passing, possessing and uttering counterfeit money. The petition below was premised on the contention that the appellant was not advised of his right to counsel. The District Court found after hearing and consideration of the proceedings at the arraignment that the appellant “was fully apprised of his right to counsel and was, in fact, offered counsel by the presiding judge.” That finding is amply sustained.

The appellant for the first time here makes the further contention that he was induced to plead guilty by inducement of Government agents. With respect to that contention it need only be said that it is settled that “Questions cannot be presented on appeal that have not first been determined by the District Court, from which the appeal is taken.” Bush v. United States, 347 F.2d 231, 232 (6 Cir. 1965).

The Order of the District Court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 F.2d 845, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-arthur-l-johnson-ca3-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack