Morse v. United States

Decision Date10 June 1958
Docket NumberNo. 17125.,17125.
Citation256 F.2d 280
PartiesJames Madison MORSE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

James Madison Morse, in pro. per.

E. Coleman Madsen, Asst. U. S. Atty., Jacksonville, Fla., James L. Guilmartin, U. S. Atty., Edith House, Asst. U. S. Atty., Southern District of Florida, Jacksonville, Fla., for appellee.

Before RIVES, JONES and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant brought a proceeding under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to have set aside his conviction and sentence for a violation of the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 2311 et seq. The appellant asserts that forty-six hours elapsed between the time of his arrest and the time when he was brought before a Commissioner for arraignment. He states that the delay was unnecessary, that during the delay efforts were made, without success, to procure a confession from him, and that he told the officers about a man known as Sparky for whom appellant had worked. He believed Sparky would testify for him. Sparky, however, testified against him and appellant expresses the belief that Sparky's testimony adverse to him was procured by coercion. But for Sparky's testimony, he claims, he would not have been convicted, and but for his unlawful detention he would not have mentioned Sparky. The doctrine of McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332, 63 S.Ct. 608, 87 L.Ed. 819, and Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L. Ed.2d 1479, does not help the appellant. Delay in taking an accused before a commissioner, though illegal, does not invalidate a conviction in the absence of prejudice resulting from the detention. United States v. Mitchell, 322 U.S. 65, 64 S.Ct. 896, 88 L.Ed. 1140; United States v. Leviton, 2d Cir., 1951, 193 F.2d 848. No such prejudice is here shown. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • U.S. v. Studley
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • November 14, 1985
    ...not decide whether Studley was in fact subjected to any delay that would constitute a Rule 5(a) violation. Cf. Morse v. United States, 256 F.2d 280 (5th Cir.1958) (per curiam) (delay in taking an accused before a magistrate, though illegal, does not invalidate a conviction absent prejudice ......
  • State v. Caffey
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1969
    ...62 S.Ct. 280, 290, 86 L.Ed. 166. The question, therefore, is whether the long delay deprived Caffey of a fair trial. Morse v. United States, 5 Cir., 256 F.2d 280 (1958); Blood v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 150 F.2d 640 (1945); cf. United States v. Mitchell, 322 U.S. 65, 70, 65 S.Ct. 896, 88 L.Ed. 114......
  • Lovelace v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • March 3, 1966
    ...Having made no such claim of prejudice, there is no logical reason to overturn the conviction on this ground. See Morse v. United States, 256 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1958); United States v. Angelet, 265 F.2d 155, 157 (2d Cir. 1959); cf. United States v. Mitchell, 322 U.S. 65, 64 S.Ct. 896, 88 L.......
  • Diaz v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana
    • March 2, 1967
    ...though illegal, does not invalidate a conviction in the absence of prejudice resulting from the detention." Morse v. United States, 256 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1958). Nor is such a detention the proper subject of collateral attack asserted against a conviction resulting from a trial not infected......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT