Verheul v. Johnston
This text of 99 F.2d 757 (Verheul v. Johnston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus. Appellant was indicted for bank robbery committed January 5, 1935, and after plea of guilty was sentenced, on May 31, 1935, to a term of twenty-five years imprisonment. He contends that the indictment stated an offense under the Act of May 18, 1934, ch. 304, 48 Stat. 783, sec. 2(a), 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subd. (a), which fixes the maximum penalty at twenty years, and not under subdivision (b), id. sec. 2(b), 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subd. (b), which fixes the maximum penalty at twenty-five years. The sentence authorized by 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subdivision (a) (20 years) not having expired, the application is premature. Smith v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 83 F.2d 321; Hall v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 86 F.2d 820; Ex parte Mhlendez, 9 Cir., 98 F.2d 791.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
99 F.2d 757, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 2981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/verheul-v-johnston-ca9-1938.