Harless v. United States, 21207.
Decision Date | 04 March 1964 |
Docket Number | No. 21207.,21207. |
Citation | 329 F.2d 397 |
Parties | James Oliver HARLESS, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Donald H. Fraser, U. S. Atty., Savannah, Ga., for appellee.
Before RIVES, CAMERON and BELL, Circuit Judges.
The appellant alleged in his petition in the District Court, that on his plea of guilty of unlawfully transporting firearms in interstate commerce (15 U.S.C.A. § 902), he was sentenced on or about February 13, 1963; that he now believes that (1) he was placed in jeopardy by that Court in violation of his rights as a citizen; (2) he was denied a just and speedy trial, fair trial, and due process of law insofar as the "Court lost jurisdiction to prosecute your petitioner." On these bare allegations, he asked that he be granted, "The records and files of all proceedings against your Petitioner, or copies thereof, in order that your Petitioner may ascertain the correctness of his beliefs."
It does not appear, and he does not allege, that any other legal proceeding is now pending relative to his said conviction, and it is obvious that the time for his direct appeal therefrom has long since expired.
The District Court denied the motion for copies of records without a hearing, but granted the application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Thereupon the appellant moved this Court for appointment of counsel to represent him upon his appeal.
As said in Ketcherside v. United States, 6 Cir. 1963, 317 F.2d 807, 808:
See also, Prince v. United States, 10 Cir. 1962, 312 F.2d 252. The statutory right to proceed in forma pauperis does not include the right to obtain copies of court orders, indictments, and transcript of record, without payment therefor, for use in proposed or prospective litigation. Hullom v. Kent, 6 Cir. 1959, 262 F.2d 862; In re Fullam, 1945, 80 U.S.App.D. C. 273, 152 F.2d 141. Furthermore, this appellant's motion to obtain free records...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Miller v. Hamm
...v. Fogliani (9th Cir. 1966) 370 F.2d 42, 44; accord: United States v. Shoaf (4th Cir. 1964) Supra, 341 F.2d 832; Harless v. United States (5th Cir. 1964) 329 F.2d 397, 398--399; Culbert v. United States (8th Cir. 1964) 325 F.2d 920, The fact that under similar circumstances an affluent pers......
-
United States v. Banks, Crim. No. 042773-86.
...of . . . the transcript of record, without payment therefor, for use in proposed or prospective litigation." Harless v. United States, 329 F.2d 397, 398-399 (5th Cir. 1964). 6 The position the court takes today is also impliedly supported by the fact that a court need not conduct a hearing ......
-
Bentley v. United States
...denied, 379 U.S. 994, 85 S.Ct. 711, 13 L.Ed.2d 613 (1965); Mundy v. Henderson, 416 F.2d 432 (6th Cir. 1969). See also Harless v. United States, 329 F.2d 397 (5th Cir. 1964); United States v. Shoaf, 341 F.2d 832 (4th Cir. The impact of the United States Constitution upon this problem has, ho......
-
Daker v. McLaughlin
...Jackson v. Fla., Dep't of Financial Services, 479 F. App'x 289, 292-93 (11th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (citing Harless v. U.S., 329 F.2d 397, 398-99 (5th Cir. 1964)). Accordingly, Petitioner's motion for access to case authorities (ECF No. 5) is DENIED. III. Motion for Leave to Appeal in Form......