Malone v. United States, 13349.
| Decision Date | 18 June 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 13349.,13349. |
| Citation | 257 F.2d 177 |
| Parties | John Raymond MALONE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
No attorney for appellant.
Sumner Canary, U. S. Atty., Russell E. Ake, Asst. U. S. Atty., and George W. Morrison, Cleveland, Ohio, for appellee.
Before MARTIN, MILLER, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was tried by jury on an indictment alleging bank robbery in violation of Section 2113(a) (d), Title 18 U. S. Code, found guilty and sentenced to a term of 20 years. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed by this Court. Malone v. United States, 6 Cir., 238 F.2d 851.
Thereafter, he moved in the District Court under the provisions of Section 2255, Title 28 U. S. Code, that the judgment be vacated. He contends that the judgment is void because federal agents participated with state police "in forcing and framing a preliminary identification by witnesses" and because he was not adequately represented by counsel. The District Judge denied the motion.
In affirming the judgment on the prior appeal we stated that appellant was represented by counsel of his own choice, the identification was by eye-witnesses, was direct and positive, and the trial was fair. The issues disposed of in that appeal will not be again reviewed in this proceeding.
Alleged inadmissibility of evidence and alleged incompetency of counsel of one's own choosing are not questions subject to review through proceedings under Section 2255, Title 28 U. S. Code, except possibly in extreme cases, of which this is not one. Ford v. United States, 6 Cir., 234 F.2d 835; Anderson v. Bannan, 6 Cir., 250 F.2d 654.
It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Warren v. United States
...in such an appeal, they will not be again reviewed in a Section 2255 proceeding. Smith v. United States, supra; Malone v. United States, 257 F.2d 177 (6 Cir. 1958); United States v. Haywood, supra; Callanan v. United States, supra; Lipscomb v. United States, 226 F.2d 812 (8 Cir. 1955); John......
-
Williams v. United States, Civ. No. 61-393.
...corrected on appeal and cannot be presented in this proceeding. Black v. United States, 9 Cir., 1959, 269 F.2d 38; Malone v. United States, 6 Cir., 1958, 257 F.2d 177. 2. In the motion for relief, signed by petitioner's attorney only, it is claimed that petitioner was insane at the time of ......
-
Miller v. State
...into evidence was not sufficiently serious to bring this case within the realm of the 'extreme cases' referred to in Malone v. United States, 257 F.2d 177 (6th Cir. 1958). Nor was the error so grave as to have deprived defendant of the fundamentally fair trial to which he was entitled. Stat......
-
Franano v. United States
...in such an appeal, they will not be again reviewed in a Section 2255 proceeding. Smith v. United States, supra; Malone v. United States, 257 F.2d 177 (6 Cir. 1958); United States v. Haywood, supra; Callanan v. United States, supra; Lipscomb v. United States, 226 F.2d 812 (8 Cir.1955); Johns......