Pledger v. United States

Decision Date06 November 1959
Docket NumberNo. 7956.,7956.
Citation272 F.2d 69
PartiesNorman Lee PLEDGER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Charles Cahn, II, Baltimore, Md. (Court-appointed counsel) for appellant.

W. F. Powers, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Norfolk, Va. (Joseph S. Bambacus, U. S. Atty., Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellee.

Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, BOREMAN, Circuit Judge, and R. DORSEY WATKINS, District Judge.


After the appellant was sentenced on May 18, 1955, to serve five years in the penitentiary for violation of the Harrison Narcotic Act (26 U.S.C.A. § 4705), he made several attacks under Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 against the judgment and sentence. In response to his latest effort, a motion asking the District Court to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence, an order was signed granting a hearing limited to the sole issue of the petitioner's sanity at the time of trial and sentencing. Later orders referred to this hearing as being on the question of mental competency, which would be broad enough to include incompetency from whatever cause; but it is quite possible that this was not fully understood by Pledger. Counsel was appointed for the petitioner, and the court arranged to make necessary medical records available to the attorney and to provide for any necessary travel expense he might incur.

The petitioner maintains that he did not wish to raise any issue of sanity, but intended to assert his mental incompetency at the trial and his inability to co-operate intelligently in his defense, by reason of the alleged administration to him of narcotic drugs by Government agents. The appellant's earlier petitions were not as clear as they might be on this point. However, after the passage of the order for a hearing limited to the question of sanity, the appellant wrote the District Judge that he had furnished the court-appointed counsel with information in support of the claim that his condition was due to drugs. The petitioner's letter concluded as follows:

"If Mr. Daugherty the court-appointed lawyer will be kind to ask the Court for a hearing on this, mental incompetency at trial due to the administration of drugs please allow him to be my counsel, if He wants to prove me insane, please dismiss Him, and throw the case in the trash can."

The court, apparently misunderstanding the petitioner's meaning, treated this as a request to rescind the order for a hearing and passed an order withdrawing the earlier order for a hearing. From this action the present appeal was taken.

An examination of the entire record, which has attained considerable volume, convinces us that the claimed incapacity at the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Nelms v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • May 10, 1963
    ...of the defendant's insanity at the time of the trial. This court has since cited Bishop as controlling authority in Pledger v. United States, 272 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1959), and has held that "it is established law in this Circuit that the mental competency of the accused to enter an intel......
  • Deese v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • September 6, 1969
    ...the law required prior to the promulgation of the Rule. Fogus v. United States (C.C.A.4, 1929) 34 F.2d 97, 98. 6 Pledger v. United States (C.C.A.4, 1959) 272 F.2d 69, 70. 7 In the following cases, pleas from defendants, who claimed they were under the influence of drugs when entering such p......
  • Butler v. District of Columbia, 3413.
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • April 30, 1964
    ...L.Ed. 2d 114 (1958); Kyle v. United States, 288 F.2d 440 (2d Cir. 1961); Funkhouser v. United States, supra, note 8; Pledger v. United States, 272 F.2d 69 (4th Cir. 1959); Hartwell v. United States, 107 F. 2d 359 (5th Cir. 10. See also, cases cited in notes 5-8, supra. 11. See the discussio......
  • Fisher v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • May 10, 1963
    ...section 4245.2 Nelms v. United States, 318 F.2d 150 (4th Cir.1963), and other authorities cited therein. See also, Pledger v. United States, 272 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir.1959); United States v. McNicholas, 298 F.2d 914, 916 (4th Cir. 1962). The other circuits, with but one exception, have adopt......
  • 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