In this application to the District Court of Kansas for a writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner complains of the failure of the sentencing court in the Southern District of Illinois to afford him an opportunity to speak in his own be half, as required by Rule 32(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The District Court denied the writ on the ground that the same matter had been presented and decided adversely to the petitioner by the sentencing court, in a proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. And see: Barkan v. United States, 7 Cir., 305 F.2d 774.

We affirm the trial Court on the ground that “[t]he failure of a trial court to ask a defendant represented by an attorney *421 whether he has anything to say before sentence is imposed is not of itself an error of the character or magnitude cognizable under a writ of habeas corpus * * Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424, 428, 82 S.Ct. 468, 471, 7 L.Ed.2d 417. And see: Martin v. United States, (10 C.A.) 309 F.2d 81.

Affirmed.