SMITH

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Houston v. United States, 419 F.2d 30 (5th Cir. 1969)
  …e 18. “Vague conclusional charges * * * in Section 2255 petitions are insufficient to raise issues that demand inquiry. * * *” Davis v. United States, 311 F. 2d 495 (7th Cir. 1963); Smith v. United States, 252 F. 2d 369 (5th Cir. 1958), cert. denied 357 U.S. 939, 78 S.Ct. 1388, 2 L.Ed.2d 1552. On direct appeal of Brookins, supra, this Court refused to consider these off the record allegations of appellant’s “fear” of being tried in the Macon Division. The appellee now places before this Court affidavits by…
• Tiny Glen A. Sears v. United States, 265 F.2d 301 (5th Cir. 1959)
  …t. Taylor v. United States, 8 Cir., 1956, 229 F. 2d 826, -certiorari denied 351 U.S. 986, 76 S.Ct. 1055, 100 L.Ed. 1500; Taylor v. United States, 9 Cir., 1955, 221 F. 2d 228. Cf. Smith v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 252 F. 2d 369, certiorari denied 357 U.S. 939, 78 S.Ct. 1388, 2 L.Ed. 2d 1552. It was not asserted that anyone acting for the Government knew that any perjured testimony was used. The appellant did not specify which witnesses made false statements nor which statements made by witnesses were fal…
• Benny Lurk v. United States, 296 F.2d 360 (D.C. Cir. 1961)
  …ccurring off and on for almost forty years. Pursuant to historical precedent he might have been designated to sit on this court; as, indeed, he was. See, for example, Hamilton v. United States, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 298, 252 F. 2d 862, certiorari denied, 357 U.S. 939, 78 S.Ct. 1389, 2 L.Ed.2d 1553 (1958); Payne v. District of Columbia, 102 U.S. App.D.C. 345, 253 F. 2d 867 (1958); Rothe v. Ford Motor Company, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 331, 253 F. 2d 353 (1958). Appendix The following are excerpts from debate in the Hous…