Nemec v. United States, 12560.
| Decision Date | 13 September 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 12560.,12560. |
| Parties | NEMEC v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
F. E. Nemec, in pro per.
Harvey Erickson, U.S. Atty., Frank R. Freeman, Asst. U.S. Atty., Spokane, Wash., for appellee.
Before MATHEWS, HEALY and POPE, Circuit Judges.
In the District Court, F. E. Nemec and others were indicted in five counts. Nemec was tried and found guilty as charged in counts 1, 2, 4 and 5. Thereupon a judgment was entered sentencing him to be imprisoned for terms aggregating four years. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed. Nemec v. United States, 9 Cir., 178 F.2d 656. Nemec then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. While the petition was pending, he moved the District Court to vacate the judgment. From an order denying the motion he has appealed. We think that, in view of the pendency of the petition, the motion was properly denied.
Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Ellenbogen
...235 F.2d 459, 461 (5 Cir. 1956), suggests that the Fifth Circuit might support the appellant's position, the case of Nemec v. United States, 184 F.2d 355 (9 Cir. 1950), indicates that the Ninth Circuit would not. Faced with no controlling authority on the point from this Circuit, Judge Coop......
-
United States v. Kobey
...determining a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 while the judgment thus sought to be vacated is under review upon appeal, Nemec v. United States, 9th Cir., 1950, 184 F.2d 355, unless directed by the appellate court to do so. Fed.Rules Crim. Proc. rule 39(a), 18 U.S.C. The motions of the defenda......
-
Feldman v. Henman
...v. United States, 269 F.2d 38, 41 (9th Cir.1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 938, 80 S.Ct. 379, 4 L.Ed.2d 357 (1960); Nemec v. United States, 184 F.2d 355 (9th Cir.1950). The reason for this rule is that "disposition of the appeal may render the [habeas corpus writ] unnecessary." Black, 269 F.2......
-
United States v. Harris
...and will prepare its own form of judgment. Either party litigant may notice the cause for re-setting for trial. 1 Cf. Nemec v. United States, 9 Cir., 1950, 184 F.2d 355; United States v. Kobey, D.C.S.D.Cal.1953, 109 F.Supp. 687; Id., D.C.S.D.Cal.1952, 109 F.Supp. 2 "United States Court of A......