Black v. United States, No. 6866.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | MURRAH, , BREITENSTEIN, Circuit , and RICE |
| Citation | 301 F.2d 418 |
| Parties | Amos BLACK, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 25 June 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 6866. |
301 F.2d 418 (1962)
Amos BLACK, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 6866.
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.
March 20, 1962.
Certiorari Denied June 25, 1962.
Alan C. DeMuth, Denver, Colo., for appellant.
Benjamin E. Franklin, Kansas City, Kan. (Newell A. George, Kansas City, Kan., was with him on brief), for appellee.
Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judge, and RICE, District Judge.
Certiorari Denied June 25, 1962. See 82 S.Ct. 1618.
MURRAH, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from an order denying an application for a writ of habeas corpus.
Appellant was convicted in the United States District Court, Southern District of California, on three counts alleging the illegal sale of narcotics. A notice of appeal was filed but the appeal was never perfected. Appellant thereafter collaterally attacked the judgment and sentence by filing in the trial court a Motion to Vacate Sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, wherein he alleged that numerous violations of his constitutional rights had occurred both before and during his trial. The trial court's denial of that Motion was affirmed. Black v. United States (9 CA), 269 F.2d 38, cert. den. 361 U.S. 938, 80 S.Ct. 379, 4 L.Ed.2d 357. Appellant then sought his release via habeas corpus in the United States District Court, District of Kansas. That court found that the questions presented in the habeas corpus motion "* * * are all questions which (petitioner) must submit to the sentencing court under 28 U.S. C.A. § 2255 * * *" and denied the motion.
It is clear that where the remedy afforded under § 2255 is adequate and effective to test the legality of the detention, it is the exclusive remedy. Barrett v. United States (10 CA), 285 F.2d 758; Williams v. U. S. (10 CA), 283 F.2d 59; Adam v. United States (10 CA) 274 F.2d 880. At oral argument, however, counsel for appellant suggested that the distance between the situs of appellant's incarceration and the trial court deprived him of his right to a full and fair hearing, and cited Stidham v. Swope, D.C., 82 F.Supp. 931 as authority for his position. In that case, the District Judge, sitting in California, felt that the distance to Missouri, where petitioner had been convicted, was so great that the delay and expense entailed in transporting petitioner there was sufficient to make inadequate and ineffective any motion in the trial court.
We do not think that mere distance between the place of detention...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rawls v. United States, No. 15218-1 and 15231-1.
...denied 368 U.S. 853, 82 S.Ct. 90, 7 L.Ed.2d 51; Burdette v. Settle, 8th Cir. 1961, 296 F.2d 687; Black v. United States, 10th Cir. 1962, 301 F.2d 418 (based on Barrett v. United States, 10th Cir. 1960, 285 F.2d 758, which we cited in Anderson); and Breaton v. United States, 8th Cir. 1962, 3......
-
Williams v. United States, No. 7387
...to accord a full and fair hearing, contemplated by § 2255, simply because of geographical inconvenience. Black v. United States (10 C.A.), 301 F.2d 418, cert. den., 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L.Ed.2d The several judgments in the cases are affirmed. ...
-
Barkan v. United States, No. 7925.
...to test the legality of a prisoner's detention. Barrett v. United States, 10 Cir., 285 F.2d 758; Black v. United States, 10 Cir., 301 F.2d 418, cert. denied 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L. Ed.2d 832; Sanchez v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 302 F.2d 725, cert. denied 371 U.S. 864, 83 S.Ct. 124, 9 L.Ed......
-
Johnson v. Taylor, No. 8106.
...95; Sanchez v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 302 F.2d 725, cert. denied 371 U.S. 864, 83 S.Ct. 124, 9 L.Ed.2d 101; Black v. United States, 10 Cir., 301 F.2d 418, cert. denied 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L.Ed.2d 832. The remedy is commensurate 347 F.2d 367 with that which was previously available by h......
-
Rawls v. United States, No. 15218-1 and 15231-1.
...denied 368 U.S. 853, 82 S.Ct. 90, 7 L.Ed.2d 51; Burdette v. Settle, 8th Cir. 1961, 296 F.2d 687; Black v. United States, 10th Cir. 1962, 301 F.2d 418 (based on Barrett v. United States, 10th Cir. 1960, 285 F.2d 758, which we cited in Anderson); and Breaton v. United States, 8th Cir. 1962, 3......
-
Williams v. United States, No. 7387
...to accord a full and fair hearing, contemplated by § 2255, simply because of geographical inconvenience. Black v. United States (10 C.A.), 301 F.2d 418, cert. den., 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L.Ed.2d The several judgments in the cases are affirmed. ...
-
Barkan v. United States, No. 7925.
...to test the legality of a prisoner's detention. Barrett v. United States, 10 Cir., 285 F.2d 758; Black v. United States, 10 Cir., 301 F.2d 418, cert. denied 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L. Ed.2d 832; Sanchez v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 302 F.2d 725, cert. denied 371 U.S. 864, 83 S.Ct. 124, 9 L.Ed......
-
Johnson v. Taylor, No. 8106.
...95; Sanchez v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 302 F.2d 725, cert. denied 371 U.S. 864, 83 S.Ct. 124, 9 L.Ed.2d 101; Black v. United States, 10 Cir., 301 F.2d 418, cert. denied 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L.Ed.2d 832. The remedy is commensurate 347 F.2d 367 with that which was previously available by h......