U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1970

Smith v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided January 21, 1970

420 F.2d 690 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Joe Smith, pro se., Ira DeMent, U. S. Atty., William H. Thomas, Asst. U. S. Atty., Montgomery, Ala., for defendant-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Raymond L. Buckelew and James Laney Jenkins v. United States of America, Judson Lee Drane v. United States (5th Cir. 1978)
Albert Fuentes, Jr., and Edward J. Montez v. United States (5th Cir. 1972)

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 of the Court

PER CURIAM:

All the contentions made by appellant in this appeal from the denial of his motion brought under Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 1 to set aside sentence have been considered and rejected by this court in his direct appeal. See Smith v. United States, 5 Cir. 1968, 392 F.2d 169; cert. denied 393 U.S. 941, 89 S.Ct. 308, 21 L. Ed.2d 278. The present appeal is therefore frivolous.2

The appeal is dismissed.

. Although appellant styled his petition “habeas corpus” w.e will treat it as a § 2255 motion.

. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have direeted the clerk to place the case on the .Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526, Part I.

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