TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

William H. Herrell v. United States of America, (Two Cases)

William H. HERRELL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee (Two Cases)

Herrell v. United States, (Two Cases), 234 F.2d 814 (6th Cir. 1956)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 6, 1956
Docket
Nos. 12692, 12693
Judges
Allen, Martin, Per Curiam, Stewart
Citations
234 F.2d 8141956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3783

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate sentence has been presented on the brief filed by appellant, who is now confined in the United States Medical Center at Springfield, Missouri, and on the oral argument and two-page brief of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee. It has been considered, also, upon the transcript of the proceedings and testimony received on the motion to vacate sentence in the United States District Court.

From all this, it appears that, on his arraignment when he waived indictment and entered a plea of guilty to the information filed against him, appellant was represented by an able, experienced and highly reputed attorney who formerly had been an Assistant United States Attorney ; and the evidence adduced on the hearing of the motion to vacate sentence shows that, at the time appellant entered his guilty plea, he was of sound mind and not mentally incompetent. He was represented by another competent attorney at the hearing of his motion to vacate.

The issue here is solely one of fact, which has been resolved against appellant upon a fair and adequate hearing in the district court upon his motion to vacate sentence. It is, therefore, unnecessary that this court should grant his motion to appoint counsel to represent him on this appeal. Were the issue one of law, an attorney would be appointed; but, inasmuch as the issue is purely one of fact, we are of opinion that his appeal would not have stood in better case had an attorney, either selected by him or appointed by this court, appeared for him in this court.

Accordingly appellant’s motion for appointment of an attorney is denied; and the judgment of the district court denying his motion to vacate sentence is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1959: 11962: 119592026peak 1959 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Edward J. Dillon v. United States307 F.2d 445 (9th Cir. 1962)
  2. Richard Lee Gilpin v. United States265 F.2d 203 (6th Cir. 1959)

Most recent

  1. Edward J. Dillon v. United States307 F.2d 445 (9th Cir. 1962)
  2. Richard Lee Gilpin v. United States265 F.2d 203 (6th Cir. 1959)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list