United States v. Ballentine
This text of 245 F.2d 223 (United States v. Ballentine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As the attorney assigned by us on March 25, 1957 has examined the transcript of the testimony at the trial and given the matter as a whole careful consideration and reports that he can find no merit whatever in the appeal and wishes to be relieved, we accede to his request.
Appellant’s application for the assignment of new counsel is denied. United States ex rel. Tierney v. Richmond, 2 Cir, 245 F.2d 222.
Appellant’s motion for an extension of time within which to file a brief and appendix pro se is granted and he may file same at any time on or before September 1, 1957.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
245 F.2d 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ballentine-ca2-1957.