Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

449 F.2d 176

Docket No. 71-1142

Smith v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Oct. 8, 1971.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1971-10-08

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1973

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Smith v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1971-10-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.*

¶2Willis Smith, pro se.

¶3Robert W. Rust, U. S. Atty., Marsha L. Lyons, Asst. U. S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for respondent-appellee.

¶4Before WISDOM, COLEMAN, and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

¶6PER CURIAM:

¶7Willis Smith is serving a fifteen year sentence for violating federal narcotics laws, 26 U.S.C. §§ 4704(a) and 4705(a) and 21 U.S.C. § 174. Following a trial *177by jury, this Court affirmed on direct appeal, Smith v. United States, 5 Cir., 1966, 357 F.2d 486.

¶8Appellant filed a “petition for writ of error coram nobis” in the trial court claiming that he was denied a fair and complete direct appeal because the trial transcript reviewed on appeal did not include the jury selection proceedings and the closing arguments of counsel. The District Court, treating the petition as a motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255,1 denied relief for failure to allege grounds upon which relief could be granted.

¶9In his petition appellant did not allege how he was prejudiced by the failure to transcribe those segments of the proceedings. Further, he made no claim of any error whatever in the selection of the jury or in the closing arguments. There being no other allegations upon which relief could be granted, the judgment below is affirmed, 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

¶10Affirmed.

/449/f2d/176 · .json · Public domain