JAMES ALLEN MCCREARY, 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.
Matters that could have been raised on direct appeal cannot form the basis for a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255.
Appellant was convicted of transporting a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce. He filed a motion to set aside the judgment and sentence, argui…
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 Direct Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion, filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, to set aside a judgment and sentence upon a verdict of a jury finding the appellant guilty of transporting in interstate commerce a stolen motor vehicle.
The only claim made below and here is: that the facts proven in the criminal action did not, under Hite v. United States, 10 Cir, 168 F. 2d 973, establish that the automobile was stolen; and that, upon the record, he was entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal and the case should not have been submitted to the jury.
We put to one side the fact that the decision in the Hite case was expressly disapproved by the Supreme Court in United States v. Turley, 352 U.S. 407, 77 S.Ct. 397, 1 L.Ed.2d 430, to say: that it it established that a proceeding under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 constitutes a collateral attack upon the judgment and sentence of the court; and that matters which could and should have been raised upon direct appeal furnish no basis for the motion. Arthur v. United States, 5 Cir, 230 F. 2d 666; Tussy v. United States, 5 Cir, 239. F. 2d 172.
On the trial of the criminal case, in which appellant was represented by counsel, there were no exceptions to the charge, no attack upon the information. In effect what appellant sought to do below and seeks to do here is, by means of a Section 2255 motion, to retry the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction, and this he cannot do.
The judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
von Eberstein v. State, 270 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
-
Horne v. United States, 264 F.2d 40 (5th Cir. 1959)
-
Tiny Glen A. Sears v. United States, 265 F.2d 301 (5th Cir. 1959)
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Turley, 352 U.S. 407 (U.S. 1957)
- Hite v. United States (two cases), 168 F.2d 973 (10th Cir. 1948)
- Arthur v. United States, 230 F.2d 666 (5th Cir. 1956)