U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1966

J. D. Hoard v. A. L. Dutton, Acting Warden, Georgia State Prison

J. D. Hoard v. A. L. Dutton, Acting Warden, Georgia State Prison
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided May 13, 1966 · Tuttle, Thornberry, Lynne
360 F.2d 673; 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6164 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Albert Sidney Johnson, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Carter A. Setliff, Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.

J. D. Hoard v. A. L. Dutton, Acting Warden, Georgia State Prison

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from denial of a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant, a Georgia state convict, is presently serving three, thirty-year concurrent sentences for three offenses of sodomy. Appellant asserts on appeal essentially the same contentions argued in the lower court: that he was denied effective assistance of counsel and that the sentences imposed constitute cruel and unusual punishment.

This court recently set forth standards for determining the question *674 of adequacy of counsel. See Williams v. Beto, 354 F.2d 698 (5th Cir. 1965). A careful review of the record, particularly the testimony of the lawyer who represented appellant, and the principles enunciated in that ease persuades us that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel.

The sentences imposed in the instant case are within the statutory limitation. Appellate courts do not revise sentences within the limits set by statute, except in the most exceptional circumstances. See United States v. Martell, 335 F.2d 764 (4th Cir. 1964). Such circumstances clearly are not present here.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.