Hopkins v. United States, 29244.
| Decision Date | 10 April 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 29244.,29244. |
| Citation | 423 F.2d 1206 |
| Parties | Thomas H. HOPKINS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Thomas H. Hopkins, pro se.
Seagal V. Wheatley, U. S. Atty., Jeremiah Handy, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Antonia, Tex., for respondent-appellee.
Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
In this case the district court denied the appellant's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 without making findings of fact and conclusions of law, as is required by the provisions of Rule 52(a), F.R.Civ.P. See Welch v. Beto, 5th Cir. 1968, 400 F.2d 582; Waters v. Beto, 5th Cir. 1968, 392 F.2d 74. Therefore the case is remanded to enable the district court to state its findings and conclusions.
Remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
Hart v. U.S.
...required the district court to state separately its findings of facts and conclusions of law in § 2255 cases, e. g., Hopkins v. United States, 423 F.2d 1206 (5th Cir. 1970), and this practice is not inconsistent with the new § 2255 Accordingly, this case is remanded to the district court fo......
-
Miller v. Henderson
...1968, 392 F.2d 74. Therefore the case is remanded to enable the district court to state its findings and conclusions. Hopkins v. United States, 5th Cir. 1970, 423 F.2d 1206. * 1 Rule 18, 5th Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5th Cir. 1970, 431 F......