From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Powell v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 13, 1949
174 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)

Opinion

No. 12539.

May 13, 1949.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Texas; T. Whitfield Davidson, Judge.

Rad Milton Powell, Jr., was convicted of an offense, and he appeals from denial of his motion to vacate the judgment of conviction.

Affirmed.

No appearance for appellant.

Frank B. Potter, U.S. Atty., Fort Worth, Texas, Clyde G. Hood, Asst. U.S. Atty., Dallas, Texas, for appellee.

Before HUTCHESON, SIBLEY, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.


Applying to the court, which had sentenced him on January 21, 1947, upon his plea of guilty, to serve three years in the federal penitentiary, petitioner sought a vacation of the judgment.

Claiming that he was denied assistance of counsel and that the record spoke falsely in stating that the defendant had pleaded guilty, petitioner insists that he was denied due process.

The record shows affirmatively that petitioner, advised of his right to counsel and asked whether he desired to have one appointed, waived the assistance of counsel and entered his plea of guilty. The petition was based upon nothing but appellant's unsupported statement to the contrary.

The district judge was right in denying the petition. The judgment is

Owens v. United States, 5 Cir., 174 F.2d 469; Ossenfort v. Pulaski, 5 Cir., 171 F.2d 246.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Powell v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 13, 1949
174 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)
Case details for

Powell v. United States

Case Details

Full title:POWELL v. UNITED STATES

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 13, 1949

Citations

174 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1949)

Citing Cases

Stacks v. United States

"Defendant: Yes, sir." We think the record shows clearly that the appellant was not deprived of any…

Lipscomb v. United States

Based upon these findings the court denied defendant's motion. On this appeal defendant calls attention to…