McGuinn v. United States, 13468.
| Citation | 239 F.2d 449,99 US App. DC 286 |
| Decision Date | 06 December 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 13468.,13468. |
| Parties | John W. McGUINN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia) |
Appellant filed a brief pro se, and his case was treated as submitted thereon.
Mr. E. Tillman Stirling, Asst. U. S. Atty. with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty. and Lewis Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief for appellee, submitted on the brief for appellee.
Before WILBUR K. MILLER, BAZELON and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant's motion, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to vacate sentence, and for other relief.1
Appellant's conviction for rape and sodomy was affirmed by this court in 1951. McGuinn v. United States, 89 U.S. App.D.C. 197, 191 F.2d 477. That appeal disposed of several points urged in the instant motion.2 These contentions were disposed of adversely to appellant and are not now available as grounds for vacating his sentence under § 2255.
The remaining points raised in appellant's motion are that he was denied adequate representation by counsel, that his conviction was effected by the use of perjured testimony, that he was denied compulsory process to obtain a witness, and that he was induced by the police to incriminate himself by the use of "alcohol drugs" and "emotional exhaustion."
We have reviewed the record of the trial. This record demonstrates that appellant had experienced, competent counsel, whose representation of appellant was adequate, and that counsel was diligent in his defense of appellant.
The first allegation of perjury concerned a government witness who testified as to the complainant's emotional state following the alleged offense. Appellant tells us that this witness lied when she testified that she did not know him. If that testimony was false, appellant knew it at the trial but made no attempt to demonstrate it by cross examination, by his own testimony or by that of rebutting witnesses, who were as readily available then as now. Appellant must be regarded as having waived this objection. The other allegation of perjury, having to do with the position of the coat of appellant,3 involves a not unusual situation where witnesses' recollections differ as to immaterial matters.
The contention that appellant was denied compulsory process to obtain the testimony of a physician who had examined the complaining witness is likewise without merit. Appellant was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pope v. United States
...States, 108 U.S.App. D.C. 375, 282 F.2d 858 (1960), affirmed, 368 U.S. 139, 82 S.Ct. 235, 7 L.Ed.2d 184; McGuinn v. United States, 99 U.S. App.D.C. 286, 239 F.2d 449 (1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 942, 77 S.Ct. 818, 1 L.Ed.2d 762, cert. denied, 359 U.S. 915, 79 S.Ct. 591, 3 L.Ed.2d 577. The......
-
U.S. v. Kearney
...it was based on claims previously raised and denied. See Hardy v. United States, 381 F.2d 941, 943 (D.C.Cir.1967); McGuinn v. United States, 239 F.2d 449, 451 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 942, 77 S.Ct. 818, 1 L.Ed.2d 762 VII. CONCLUSION This case personifies the great abuse of repetit......
-
Hardy v. United States
...110 U.S.App.D. C. 69, 288 F.2d 881 (1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 958, 82 S.Ct. 400, 7 L.Ed.2d 389 (1962); McGuinn v. United States, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 286, 239 F.2d 449 (1955), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 942, 77 S.Ct. 818, 1 L.Ed.2d 762 (1957); VanBuskirk v. United States, 343 F.2d 158 (6th Cir. ......
-
United States v. Thompson, 126
...mandate is thus to be delayed in the hope of inducing some judicial vacillation. See, e. g., cases such as McGuinn v. United States, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 286, 239 F.2d 449, certiorari denied 353 U.S. 942, 77 S.Ct. 818, 1 L.Ed.2d 762; Herman v. United States, 4 Cir., 227 F.2d 332; United States v......