Woodrow W. Gainey, Jr. v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Woodrow W. Gainey, Jr. v. United States

324 F.2d 731, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 3718

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 14, 1963

Docket20369

StatusPublished

This text of 324 F.2d 731 (Woodrow W. Gainey, Jr. 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

Woodrow W. Gainey, Jr. v. United States, 324 F.2d 731, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 3718 (5th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate Appellant’s sentence imposed following his conviction of voluntary manslaughter committed within and at the United States Penitentiary in Fulton County, Georgia. The sole ground of attack is that Georgia, not the United States, alone had power to prohibit or convict for this action. As the offense was committed on lands purchased by the United States by the consent of the legislature of the State of Georgia, and the United States Penitentiary in Fulton County, Georgia, is a “needful building” within the meaning of U.S.Const, art. I, § 8, el. 17, the United States has legislative jurisdiction over those lands, United States v. Unzeuta, 1930, 281 U.S. 138, 50 S.Ct. 284, 74 L.Ed. 761; Battle v. United States, 1908, 209 U.S. 36, 28 S.Ct. 422, 52 L.Ed. 670. Consequently the District Judge did not err in denying Appellant’s motion to vacate sentence.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate Appellant’s sentence imposed following his conviction of voluntary manslaughter committed within and at the United States Penitentiary in Fulton County, Georgia. The sole ground of attack is that Georgia, not the United States, alone had power to prohibit or convict for this action. As the offense was committed on lands purchased by the United States by the consent of the legislature of the State of Georgia, and the United States Penitentiary in Fulton County, Georgia, is a “needful building” within the meaning of U.S.Const, art. I, § 8, el. 17, the United States has legislative jurisdiction over those lands, United States v. Unzeuta, 1930, 281 U.S. 138, 50 S.Ct. 284, 74 L.Ed. 761; Battle v. United States, 1908, 209 U.S. 36, 28 S.Ct. 422, 52 L.Ed. 670. Consequently the District Judge did not err in denying Appellant’s motion to vacate sentence.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 F.2d 731, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 3718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodrow-w-gainey-jr-v-united-states-ca5-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack