United States v. Russell

Second Circuit

United States v. Russell

238 F.2d 605

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedOctober 25, 1956

DocketNo. 62, Docket 24122

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 238 F.2d 605 (United States v. Russell) 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.

Bluebook

United States v. Russell, 238 F.2d 605 (2d Cir. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant petitioned, under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, for the vacation of a judgment of conviction entered in 1931 on his plea of guilty, on the ground that he did not have the assistance of counsel pursuant to the Sixth Amendment. After a hearing on the petition, Judge Weinfeld, who saw [606]*606and heard the appellant testify, found as a fact that, in 1931, appellant had intelligently waived his right to counsel. D. C., 146 F.Supp. 102, Judge Weinfeld’s opinion specifically states that this conclusion was based on his personal impression of appellant’s demeanor on the witness stand in addition to the fact of appellant’s numerous prior court experiences.

We affirm on Judge Weinfeld’s opinion.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant petitioned, under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, for the vacation of a judgment of conviction entered in 1931 on his plea of guilty, on the ground that he did not have the assistance of counsel pursuant to the Sixth Amendment. After a hearing on the petition, Judge Weinfeld, who saw [606]*606and heard the appellant testify, found as a fact that, in 1931, appellant had intelligently waived his right to counsel. D. C., 146 F.Supp. 102, Judge Weinfeld’s opinion specifically states that this conclusion was based on his personal impression of appellant’s demeanor on the witness stand in addition to the fact of appellant’s numerous prior court experiences.

We affirm on Judge Weinfeld’s opinion.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 F.2d 605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-russell-ca2-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack