Washington v. United States, 19347.
| Decision Date | 08 November 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 19347.,19347. |
| Parties | Walter X. WASHINGTON, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Gilbert E. Toll, Cohen & Fitzpatrick, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
Herbert J. Stern, U. S. Atty., Newark, N. J. (William Braniff, Asst. U. S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.
Before ALDISERT, GIBBONS and ROSENN, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was convicted of bank robbery and assaulting or putting in jeopardy by use of a dangerous weapon in connection with bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). He seeks review of the district court's denial of his motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, that his guilty plea was accepted in violation of Rule 11, F.R.Cr.P.
Rule 4(a), F.R.A.P., provides that notice of appeal of civil actions must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the judgment or order appealed from, or, if the United States is a party, within sixty days of such entry. A motion under § 2255, like a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, is an independent civil suit. Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. 415, 418, n. 7, 79 S.Ct. 451, 3 L.Ed. 2d 407 (1959). The district court's order denying appellant's motion was entered on April 2, 1970. Because notice of appeal was not filed until September 2, 1970, this court is without jurisdiction to hear this appeal. F.R.A.P. 4(a).
The appeal will be dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Fiorelli
...U.S. 205, 209 n. 4, 72 S.Ct. 263, 96 L.Ed. 232 (1952); Neely v. United States, 546 F.2d 1059, 1065 (3d Cir.1976); Washington v. United States, 450 F.2d 945, 946 (3d Cir.1971). Congress and the Supreme Court altered this tradition in 1976 with the adoption of the Rules Governing Section 2255......
-
In re Heartland Mem'l Hosp., LLC
...that we are therefore without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Rule 3(a) Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Washington v. United States, 450 F.2d 945 (3rd Cir.1971); Harris Truck Lines, Inc. v. Cherry Meat Packers, Inc., 303 F.2d 609 (7th Cir.1962). ... Our holding may appear harsh;......
-
Brainerd v. Beal
...that we are therefore without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Rule 3(a) Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Washington v. United States, 450 F.2d 945 (3rd Cir. 1971); Harris Truck Lines, Inc. v. Cherry Meat Packers, Inc., 303 F.2d 609 (7th Cir. Brainerd misplaces his reliance upon u......
- United States v. Littlepage, 71-1692.