L. C. GREEN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-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 even if arrest warrants were defective, the defendant is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because he showed no prejudice from the arrests.
The defendant filed two motions to vacate his judgment and sentence, arguing his convictions were invalid due to arrest warrants lacking proper suppor…
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 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Motion To Vacate Sentence) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Green filed two motions to vacate judgment and sentence in the district court on the same date, both of which were denied for lack of merit. Finding no error in the rulings below, we affirm.
In one of the § 2255 motions, he contended that his conviction for theft from an interstate shipment was invalid because he was arrested on the basis of a warrant lacking a proper supporting affidavit. The identical argument was presented in his other motion, wherein he sought to have his convictions for transporting and receiving or concealing a stolen motor vehicle set aside.
As the district court correctly held, even if the arrest warrants were defective, Green has shown no prejudice emanating from the arrests inasmuch as no incriminating statements were made, nor was any property seized at the time of the arrest, which was used in evidence against him. Thus, he is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Davis v. United States, 5th Cir. 1970, 424 F. 2d 1061, cert. denied 1970, 400 U.S. 836, 91 S.Ct. 72, 27 L.Ed.2d 68; Barber v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F. 2d 775; Abraham v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1969, 407 F. 2d 826.
The judgments appealed from are affirmed,
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Huerta-Cabrera v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 466 F.2d 759 (7th Cir. 1972)
-
Medina-Sandoval v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 524 F.2d 658 (9th Cir. 1975)
-
United States v. Sanchez-Rodriguez, 475 F.2d 61 (9th Cir. 1973)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Rhodes v. Craven, 400 U.S. 836 (U.S. 1970)
- Payne v. United States, 400 U.S. 836 (U.S. 1970)
- Ghazi Abraham v. Louie L. Wainwright, 407 F.2d 826 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Geno Henry Barber v. United States, 412 F.2d 775 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Davis v. United States, 424 F.2d 1061 (5th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. Green, 446 F.2d 1169 (5th Cir. 1971)
- United States v. Green, 445 F.2d 854 (5th Cir. 1971)