William Joseph Smith v. United States

Fifth Circuit

William Joseph Smith v. United States

340 F.2d 953

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 12, 1965

Docket21172

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 340 F.2d 953 (William Joseph Smith v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

William Joseph Smith v. United States, 340 F.2d 953 (5th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a denial by the District Court of the appellant’s motions to withdraw his pleas of guilty, pursuant to Rule 32(c), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; to vacate, set aside and correct his sentences, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255; to withdraw his consents to transfer under Rule 20, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and to reduce the sentences imposed pursuant to Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

A review of the record discloses that no error was committed by the District Court, in its denial of these motions, which would require reversal. Although consideration of the report of the presentence investigation, prior to the appellant’s pleas of guilty, was proscribed by the terms of Rule 32(c) (1), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, we find such prior consideration by the sentencing Court to be harmless under the circumstances of this case. The appellant had consented to disposition of the case in the district of his arrest, and had expressed his intention to plead guilty, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 20, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and it is clear from the record that his substantial rights were not affected by the District Court’s consideration of the report after consent under Rule 20, but before arraignment.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a denial by the District Court of the appellant’s motions to withdraw his pleas of guilty, pursuant to Rule 32(c), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; to vacate, set aside and correct his sentences, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255; to withdraw his consents to transfer under Rule 20, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and to reduce the sentences imposed pursuant to Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

A review of the record discloses that no error was committed by the District Court, in its denial of these motions, which would require reversal. Although consideration of the report of the presentence investigation, prior to the appellant’s pleas of guilty, was proscribed by the terms of Rule 32(c) (1), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, we find such prior consideration by the sentencing Court to be harmless under the circumstances of this case. The appellant had consented to disposition of the case in the district of his arrest, and had expressed his intention to plead guilty, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 20, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and it is clear from the record that his substantial rights were not affected by the District Court’s consideration of the report after consent under Rule 20, but before arraignment.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 F.2d 953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-joseph-smith-v-united-states-ca5-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack