JAMES DURWOOD GRISHAM, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

10th Cir. | 1970-06-03
No. 655-69
427 F.2d 157 United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (1970)

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.


Holding

A petitioner must affirmatively allege that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was asserted at trial to be eligible for relief in a § 2255 proceeding.


Facts & Procedural History

Petitioner was convicted in 1963 for drug trafficking offenses and did not appeal. He later filed a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 22…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner James Durwood Grisham, in 1963, was convicted on a six count indictment and sentenced to imprisonment for five years on each count, to be served concurrently, for violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 4742(a), 7237(b), 4744(a) (1), 4744 (a) (2), 4755(a) and 21 U.S.C. § 176a, all involving trafficking in marijuana. No appeal was taken. In this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, petitioner asserts that on the principles announced in Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57 (1969) and like cases, with respect to his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, his conviction and sentence should be vacated. Petitioner did not allege that the self-incrimination issue was raised as a defense at the trial of the case. The motion was denied without a hearing. The sole question presented in this appeal then becomes whether the petitioner in a § 2255 proceeding must affirmatively allege that he asserted the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination under Leary, supra.

We have held that the privilege against self-incrimination cannot be raised for the first time in post-conviction proceedings. Sepulveda v. United States, 415 F. 2d 321 (10th Cir. 1969). The failure to allege that the Fifth Amendment privilege was asserted at the trial is fatal to the petitioner’s motion.1 Hilliard v. United States, 345 F. 2d 252 (10th Cir. 1965).

Affirmed.

. In its order denying the motion, the trial court found that “the record conclusively shows that petitioner made no plea based on the privilege against self-incrimination. * * * ” The record here does not disclose the basis for this finding.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw