WILLIAM BELA BINDER, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the appellant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel or denied a fair trial.
Appellant was found guilty of violating a federal statute and conspiring to do so. He claimed ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of a fair t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fair And Impartial Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding appellant guilty of violating Title 18, §' 659 of the United States Code, and of conspiring to violate that section. Appellant contends that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel and denied a fair and impartial trial in violation of his Constitutional rights.
These contentions are without merit. The record shows that appellant was without counsel until the third day of his trial, but it is evident that this situation was brought about in spite of rather than because of the conduct of the trial judge.
The record clearly shows that the trial judge was scrupulously and patiently careful to protect the rights of appellant. The appellant was confined in the Wayne County jail prior to trial. On at least three occasions, many days before the date set for trial, the trial judge arranged to have the appellant appear in court and offered to appoint counsel for him. These offers were declined. The trial judge on each occasion gave appellant a fair and completely reasonable opportunity to communicate with and employ counsel of his choice.
The trial judge was not obliged to force counsel upon the appellant. See United States v. Steese, 3 Cir., 1944, 144 F. 2d 439; Woolard v. United States, 5 Cir., 1949, 178 F. 2d 84.
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tinkle v. United States, 254 F.2d 23 (8th Cir. 1958)
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Steese, 144 F.2d 439 (3d Cir. 1944)
- Woolard v. United States, 178 F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1949)