Gershon v. United States
Decision Date | 18 April 1957 |
Citation | 243 F.2d 527 |
Parties | Barney GERSHON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Barney Gershon, pro se.
Before GARDNER, Chief Judge, and SANBORN, Circuit Judge.
Barney Gershon, a federal prisoner, has petitioned this Court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal from an order of the District Court dated February 12, 1957, denying his motion, under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, for the vacation of a sentence of ten years imprisonment imposed May 7, 1954. This sentence was based upon his plea of guilty to two counts of a four-count information (indictment having been waived) charging in each count a separate sale of heroin in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 2554(a), and upon his admission that he had six prior convictions for similar offenses as stated in an information filed by the United States Attorney with the court. The sentence imposed was the minimum sentence prescribed by the applicable statute1 (referred to as the Boggs Act) "for a third or subsequent offense."
Gershon's petition to this Court for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis shows that he had twice unsuccessfully moved the District Court to vacate his sentence on the ground that the statute under which he was sentenced was unconstitutional and discriminatory in that, unlike other federal criminal statutes, it provides greater penalties for violators with similar prior convictions.
Gershon's petition to this Court also shows that he petitioned the District Court for leave to appeal in forma pauperis from its order of February 12, 1957, denying his second motion to vacate his sentence. That order reads as follows:
"Said motion is hereby overruled, not only for the reason that the court may not be required to entertain more than one motion, but also for the reason that it is entirely without merit."
The District Court, in denying Gershon leave to appeal in forma pauperis from this order, stated that the appeal "is entirely without merit, and therefore not taken in good faith."
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) authorizes proceedings in forma pauperis on appeal, but provides that "An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith."
Gershon contends that the District Court abused its discretion in denying him leave to appeal in forma pauperis, and asserts:
In cases such as this, where it is difficult for this Court to determine from a petition what basis an impecunious defendant has for contending that his case involves a meritorious question which he ought to be permitted to have reviewed at government expense and that a District Court's certification that his appeal is frivolous and not taken in good faith is unwarranted, we have made it a practice to procure from the sentencing court the files and records which, if the appeal were perfected, would constitute the original record on appeal. We do this for the purpose of satisfying ourselves that we understand the situation out of which the petition arises and the nature of the question which the petitioner contends would justify the Court in granting him leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
In Wells v. United States, 318 U.S. 257, 259, 63 S.Ct. 582, 584, 87 L.Ed. 746, the Supreme Court has said:
We have regarded that statement as applicable to petitions such as the instant one. See and compare, Higgins v. Steele, 8 Cir., 195 F.2d 366.
The District Court was not required to entertain the second motion to vacate sentence made by...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Weller v. Dickson
...v. Murphy, 2 Cir., 1957, 245 F.2d 751 (habeas corpus); Hill v. Settle, 8 Cir., 1957, 244 F.2d 311 (habeas corpus); Gershon v. United States, 8 Cir., 1957, 243 F.2d 527 (§ Proceedings in forma pauperis are not new. They go back at least as far as the Statute of 11 Henry VII, Ch. 12. (See Bri......
-
Bearden v. United States
...the preliminary phase of obtaining permission to appeal in forma pauperis. See In re Dinerstein, 9 Cir., 258 F.2d 609; Gershon v. United States, 8 Cir., 243 F.2d 527, 530." The importance of oral argument to the ultimate decision is well understood. Absence of counsel at that stage may be, ......
-
McCrary v. State
...State, 1954, 233 Ind. 555, 121 N.E.2d 877; Ellis v. United States, 1958, 356 U.S. 674, 78 S.Ct. 974, 2 L.Ed.2d 1060; Gershon v. United States, 8 Cir., 1957, 243 F.2d 527, certiorari denied 355 U.S. 873, 78 S.Ct. 124, 2 L.Ed.2d 78; Hayes v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 258 F.2d 400, certiora......
-
State v. Smith, 46509
...judgments of Federal courts and contains provisions in substance similar of Supreme Court Rule 27.26. In the case of Gershon v. United States, 8 Cir., 243 F.2d 527, 529, certiorari denied 355 U.S. 873, 78 S.Ct. 124, 2 L.Ed.2d 78, it was held that a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. Sec. 2255 filed b......