From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hanley v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 19, 1955
222 F.2d 566 (D.C. Cir. 1955)

Opinion

No. 12525.

Argued May 9, 1955.

Decided May 19, 1955.

Mr. T. Emmett McKenzie, Washington, D.C., for appellant.

Mr. Fred L. McIntyre, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Leo A. Rover, U.S. Atty., and Lewis Carroll and E. Riley Casey, Asst. U.S. Attys., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before EDGERTON, PRETTYMAN and WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judges.


Indicted in two counts charging respectively housebreaking and grand larceny, James F. Hanley was found guilty of both offenses by a jury in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He was sentenced to imprisonment for from four to twelve years on the housebreaking count, and to a term of one year on the larceny charge, the sentences to run concurrently. He did not appeal. Some nine months after the sentences were pronounced, Hanley filed a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, asserting the trial judge should have sua sponte directed an acquittal on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction of such offenses. Cf. Rule 29(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C. This appeal is from the order which denied the motion.

A question as to the sufficiency of the proofs at the trial in which the prisoner was convicted cannot be raised by a motion to vacate under § 2255. Finan v. United States, 4 Cir., 1949, 177 F.2d 850.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Hanley v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 19, 1955
222 F.2d 566 (D.C. Cir. 1955)
Case details for

Hanley v. United States

Case Details

Full title:James F. HANLEY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: May 19, 1955

Citations

222 F.2d 566 (D.C. Cir. 1955)
95 U.S. App. D.C. 400

Citing Cases

Hall v. United States

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment of conviction is a question which cannot be…

Brule v. United States

Appellant attempts to contest the sufficiency of the evidence to arrest, detain or convict him. A motion…