Belt v. Zerbst, 1358.
| Decision Date | 21 February 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 1358.,1358. |
| Citation | 82 F.2d 18 |
| Parties | BELT v. ZERBST, Warden. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
J. S. Belt, in pro. per.
Summerfield S. Alexander, U. S. Atty., and D. C. Hill, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Topeka, Kan., for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS, McDERMOTT, and BRATTON, Circuit Judges.
Belt and one Kelly were tried, convicted and sentenced in the District Court of the United States, for the Northern District of Texas on an indictment charging violations of 18 U.S.C.A. § 338. On appeal the judgment was affirmed. See Belt v. U. S. (C.C.A.5) 73 F.(2d) 888, 889.
Belt filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the Court of Appeals found that Kelly signed and placed in the Post Office, each of the letters mailed for the purpose of executing the scheme to defraud.
The trial court sustained a motion to dismiss the application and Belt has appealed. He contends that the use of the mails is the gist of the offense, and since he did not personally sign and mail any of the letters to execute the scheme to defraud, he is unlawfully imprisoned.
In Belt v. U. S., supra, the court said:
We agree with the conclusion reached by the Fifth Circuit; but if we did not, the result would be the same. Where one seeks discharge from confinement after conviction for an offense upon an application for a writ of habeas corpus, the only questions presented are whether petitioner was convicted by a court having jurisdiction of his person and the offense, and whether the sentence pronounced was one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mercer v. Lence
...Canadian court was without jurisdiction and sentence was void. The burden was upon him which he has failed to sustain. Belt v. Zerbst, Warden, 10th Cir., 82 F.2d 18. 4. Appellant seeks advantage of that provision in section 155, 8 U.S.C.A., as follows: "The provision of this section respect......
-
Lewis v. Hudspeth, 1790.
...is as to whether each offense requires proof of any fact which the other does not. Chrysler v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 81 F.2d 975; Belt v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 82 F.2d 18; Norton v. Zerbst, Warden, 10 Cir., 83 F.2d 677; Weeks v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 85 F.2d 996; Casebeer v. United States, 10 Cir., 87 F.2......
-
Zahn v. Hudspeth
...jurisdiction of the offense and of the person of the defendant, and whether the sentence pronounced was one authorized by law. Belt v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 82 F.2d 18; Norton v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 83 F.2d 677; Weeks v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 85 F.2d The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United......
-
United States v. Skoog, Crim. A. No. 14674.
...court having jurisdiction over the offense and the defendant, and whether the sentence imposed was authorized by the statute. Belt v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 82 F.2d 18, and cases therein cited. The petition and briefs set out what purports to be a copy of the contract establishing this particular......