Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

466 F.2d 502

Docket No. 72-1295.

Patrick v. United States

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Sept. 15, 1972.

Decided Sept. 20, 1972.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1972-09-20

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 1973

4 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

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

Relies on Sanders v. United States · Young v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1972-09-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*503Charles B. Patrick, pro se.

¶2Daniel Bartlett, Jr., U. S. Atty., and J. Patrick Glynn, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., on brief, for appellee.

¶3Before BRIGHT and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judges, and TALBOT SMITH, Senior District Judge.*

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6Charles B. Patrick appeals from a dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his twenty-year sentence imposed in 1958.

¶7This is Patrick’s fourth such motion and his allegation of ineffective counsel was considered on its merits by the district court in 1970 and the appeal from that decision was dismissed as frivolous by this Court in Patrick v. United States, (C.A.8 No. 20280, May 28, 1970) in an unreported decision.

¶8The district court is not required to entertain successive motions for similar relief on behalf of the same person. Young v. United States, 457 F.2d 800 (C.A.8 1972). See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963). A review of the record convinces us that Patrick’s allegations have already been fully considered in the federal courts and that this case is appropriate for summary affirmance. See Rule 14.

¶9Affirmed.

/466/f2d/502 · .json · Public domain