United States v. Leon George Wagner, 309 F.2d 7 (6th Cir. 1962). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Leon George Wagner, 309 F.2d 7 (6th Cir. 1962). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Robert E. Meyer v. United States (ca8, 1970-04-20)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert E. Meyer v. United States (2×)
8th Cir. · 1970 · confidence medium
In Cantrell v. United States, 413 F.2d 629, 632 (8th Cir. 1969), we held that “where a defendant seeks to have his sentence vacated on the ground that he would not have pleaded guilty had he been aware that the confession was not admissible in evidence, the courts, including this one, have ruled that this does not render the guilty plea involuntary where the defendant has been informed of the charge against him, of the possible penalties, and of his rights at the time of entering his plea.” To the same effect see Semet v. United States, 369 F.2d 90, 92 (10th Cir. 1966); Snipe v. United Sta…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Albert Lonzo Cantrell v. United States
8th Cir. · 1969 · confidence medium
Hall v. United States, 259 F.2d 430, 431 (8 Cir. 1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 947 , 79 S.Ct. 728 , 3 L.Ed.2d 680 ; United States v. Wagner, 309 F.2d 7, 8 (6 Cir. 1962); United States v. French, 274 F.2d 297 (7 Cir. 1960); Snipe v. United States, 343 F.2d 25 , 28 n. 5 (9 Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 960 , 86 S.Ct. 440 , 15 L.Ed.2d 363 ; Semet v. United States, 369 F.2d 90, 92 (10 Cir. 1966).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Leon George WAGNER, Defendant-Appellant
14923.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Oct 10, 1962.
309 F.2d 7
Leon George Wagner, in pro. per., Lawrence Gubow, U. S. Atty., Detroit, Mich., for appellee.
McAllister, Darr, Boyd.
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

This is an appeal from the District Court’s denial of appellant’s motion under Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to vacate sentence of seventeen (17) years’ imprisonment entered by the District Judge upon a plea of guilty to four separate offenses of bank robbery, Title 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). The appeal has been considered upon briefs submitted by the appellant and the government;

AND IT APPEARING that illegal arrest, illegal detention, and illegal search and seizure are the ultimate bases of this motion to vacate sentence and that grounds of this nature are not proper grounds in a Section 2255 proceeding, as this Court has held in United States v. Shields, 291 F.2d 798, C.A.6, (1961); cert. denied 368 U.S. 933, 82 S.Ct. 371, 7 L.Ed.2d 196;

AND IT FURTHER APPEARING that appellant understandingly and voluntarily entered his guilty plea after waiver of right to counsel and a full explanation by the Court concerning the nature and consequences of such plea;

AND IT FURTHER APPEARING that sentence imposed after such plea is not subject to attack on the theory that a confession was unlawfully obtained and inadmissible in evidence, and that except for such confession defendant would not have pleaded guilty, United States v. French, 274 F.2d 297, C.A.7 (1960);

AND IT FURTHER APPEARING that there was no reversible error in the rulings by the District Judge on the motion to vacate sentence herein;

It Is Hereby Ordered and Adjudged that the District Court’s denial of appellant’s motion to vacate sentence is in all things affirmed.