TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

James S. West v. United States

James S. WEST, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

West v. United States, 326 F.2d 633 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
October 7, 1963
Docket
No. 17936_1
Judges
Miller, Fahy, Wright
Citations
326 F.2d 633117 U.S. App. D.C. 90

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

In Young v. United States, 114 U.S. App.D.C. 42, 309 F.2d 662 (1962), we reversed a conviction of Young of assault with intent to commit robbery in violation of 22 D.C.Code § 501. James S. West, the present appellant, had been tried with Young for the same offense. He too was convicted, but he did not appeal. The reversal in Young’s case was on the ground that the trial court had erred in refusing to give a requested instruction on the lesser included offense of simple assault. On the remand of that case, as we are advised, the indictment against Young was dismissed. Thereafter a communication of West to the District Judge was considered by the District Court as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his sentence. After a hearing the court filed a Memorandum Opinion which included findings of fact and conclusions of law, and denied the motion. This appeal followed.

We have the bare question whether reversal, for the reason we have stated, of the conviction of West’s co-defendant Young, now enables West successfully to challenge collaterally, under Section 2255, his own unappealed conviction. We think not. Assuming arguendo that the error which led to the reversal in Young’s case would have led to a like result in West’s case had he appealed, it is not error of the character which affords a basis for relief under Section 2255. Any relief to which West might be entitled in the circumstances we think must now be left to the discretion of the Executive in the exercise of the power of clemency.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1967: 11968: 119672026peak 1967 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Diaz v. United States264 F. Supp. 937 (E.D. La. 1967)
  2. Martin F. Feeney v. United States392 F.2d 541 (1st Cir. 1968)

Most recent

  1. Martin F. Feeney v. United States392 F.2d 541 (1st Cir. 1968)
  2. Diaz v. United States264 F. Supp. 937 (E.D. La. 1967)

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
Young v. United States, 309 F.2d 662 (D.C. Cir. 1962) 17

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