Sanders v. United States, 7125.
| Decision Date | 11 January 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 7125.,7125. |
| Citation | 230 F.2d 127 |
| Parties | Hilliard SANDERS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Hilliard Sanders, pro se.
William F. Mosner, Asst. U. S. Atty., Baltimore, Md. (George Cochran Doub, U. S. Atty., Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for appellee.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
Writ of Certiorari Denied May 28, 1956. See 76 S.Ct. 852.
This is an appeal from an order denying a petition to vacate and set aside under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 the judgment and sentence of imprisonment which was affirmed by this court in Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 127 F.2d 647; Id., 317 U.S. 626, 63 S.Ct. 37, 87 L.Ed. 506. A similar motion was heard by the District Court in 1950, 92 F.Supp. 447, and the action of the court in denying same had been affirmed by this court. Sanders v. United States, 4 Cir., 183 F.2d 748. Appellant was represented in the trial court by counsel of his own choosing and employment and, as this court held on his appeal, was properly convicted of the crime charged against him, notwithstanding his defense of alibi. The statute upon which he bases his motion may not be used to retry the case or to raise questions which might have been raised upon appeal. There is nothing to the contrary in United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205, 72 S.Ct. 263, 96 L.Ed. 232 or United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248 upon which appellant relies. Nothing need be added to the opinion filed by the District Judge in entering the order from which this appeal is taken. See 138 F.Supp. 192.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Norman
...that might have been but were not raised on direct appeal may not be raised subsequently in a § 2255 motion. Sanders v. United States, 230 F.2d 127, 127 (4th Cir. 1956). Generally, "claims not raised on direct appeal may not be raised on collateral review unless the petitioner shows cause a......
-
Edwards v. United States, Civil Action No. RDB-10-3100
...States, 332 F. Supp. 397, 402(D.C. Md. 1971) (citing Hall v. United States, 410 F.2d 653, 657 (4th Cir. 1969) and Sanders v. United States, 230 F.2d 127 (4th Cir. 1956)). To present a cognizable Section 2255 attack, the evidence must indicate that "a conviction is so devoid of evidentiary s......
-
Fuller v. United States
...issues that might have been, but were not, raised on direct appeal may not be raised subsequently in a § 2255 motion. Sanders v. United States, 230 F.2d 127 (4th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 351 U.S. 955 (1956). Claims of prosecutorial misconduct should generally be raised on direct appeal. Re......
-
Chandler v. United States
...dimension going to the fundamental fairness of the trial. Hall v. United States, 410 F.2d 653, 657 (4th Cir. 1969); Sanders v. United States, 230 F.2d 127 (4th Cir. 1956); see Kaufman v. United States, 394 U.S. 217, 89 S.Ct. 1068, 22 L.Ed.2d 227 (1969). In the absence of circumstances indic......