Wells v. United States
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision. The 10 that cite it most often are listed here.
- United States v. Abraham Flores (5th Cir. 1993)
- Carl William Powers v. United States (5th Cir. 1971)
- Coleman Harper Bell v. United States (5th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. Anthony Orlando (6th Cir. 1964)
- Hugh Gant v. United States (5th Cir. 1962)
- H. A. Lott, Lee Blocker and Lorn D. Frazier v. United States (5th Cir. 1960)
- Prince v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1957)
- Truman Thomas Corcoran, Jr. v. United States (7th Cir. 1956)
- Paul J. Madigan, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Alcatraz, California v. Selvie W. Wells (9th Cir. 1955)
- Wells v. Swope (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1954)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This appeal is from an order of the district court denying appellant’s motion to vacate a judgment and sentence. The appellant entered a plea of guilty to an indictment in four counts charging the robbery of a bank by force and violence, assault upon a person in the commission of the robbery, robbery of the bank by putting the life of a person in jeopardy by the use of a dangerous weapon, and entering the bank with the intention of committing a felony therein. He was sentenced to the maximum imprisonment for each count, to be served consecutively. This is the fourth motion filed by the appellant to vacate said judgment and sentence. As reported in 124 F.2d 384, the first motion resulted in the setting aside of the sentence on counts one and two for the reason that the first three counts alleged only one offense, and only one sentence should have been imposed thereon. This court upheld the sentence imposed on the fourth count, as it was a separate and distinct offense. 124 F.2d 334.
The appellant raises the question as to whether the sentence on count four is void for the reason that it constitutes a conviction for the same offense as described in count three. We are of the opinion that the decision of this court in Wells v. United States, 124 F.2d 334, involving the same question, clearly held the appellant’s entry of the bank with the intent to rob it to be a separate offense. The motion made by appellant under Section 2255 of Title 28 of the United States Code is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and the statute provides that it is not required to entertain a second motion for similar relief on behalf of the same prisoner. The discretion of the trial court in denying the motion was not abused. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.