Hall v. United States, 16031.

• Decision Date: 12 November 1958
• Docket Number: No. 16031.,16031.
• Citation: 259 F.2d 430
• Parties: John HALL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

259 F.2d 430 (1958)

John HALL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 16031.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

October 7, 1958.

Rehearing Denied November 12, 1958.

John Hall pro se.

Harry Richards, U.S. Atty., and John A. Newton, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.

Before SANBORN, WOODROUGH and VOGEL, Circuit Judges.

WOODROUGH, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is taken to reverse a judgment which denied a motion to vacate or correct a sentence of imprisonment for twenty-five years imposed upon appellant on October 22nd, 1954, when he pleaded guilty to armed robbery of a Federal Savings and Loan Association in which the life of the President of the Association was put in jeopardy by the use of a dangerous weapon, all in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2113(a) and (d).

The sentence was imposed by the late Judge Hulen and the motion to vacate or correct it was presented to Judge Weber. Judge Weber properly treated the motion as coming under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, considered it upon a review of the record of the case, and made complete findings and conclusions which have been brought here with the order denying the motion.

It is stated in the brief filed by appellant in this Court that "* * * the most substantial question presented by this appeal is whether or not the proper application of Rule 5(a) Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. was made in the proceedings against him. Petitioner contends that it was not".

That section of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that an arrested person shall be taken before the nearest available commissioner or before any other nearby officer empowered to commit persons charged with offenses against the laws of the United States "without unnecessary delay". Appellant's allegations in his motion, that his "constitutional rights were violated" and "the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States", were related to alleged violations of those provisions of the Rule. The allegations of fact in the motion were as follows:

"That on or about September 10, 1954, at approximately 3:00 o\'clock P.M., defendant\'s car was compelled to pull over to the curb of a street in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, by an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. That said agent entered the automobile of the defendant and compelled the defendant to drive to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Branch Office at the new Federal Building in the City of St. Louis. Upon arriving there the defendant was placed through four hours of intensive interrogation without legal advice or counsel; that after four hours of interrogation the defendant signed a statement confessing to a crime of robbing a Federal Savings and Loan Company. That subsequently the Federal Bureau of Investigation agent and another unidentified person removed the defendant to the County Jail and the following morning at 8:00 o\'clock A.M. the defendant was removed from his cell at the jail and placed in a line up of other persons; that subsequently his finger prints and photograph were taken. The defendant was then returned to his cell where he was left for a period of about five hours before being removed to the City Jail. The defendant was kept at the City Jail for about three hours before being taken before the United States Commissioner where he was charged again without being given legal advice or being advised of his Constitutional rights and then returned to the City Jail."

The record disclosed and the court found that when the appellant appeared before the court below, two attorneys were appointed for him. Thereafter he was present in court with his couns...