Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

99 F.2d 113

Docket No. 8865.

Audette v. United States

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Sept. 19, 1938.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1938-09-19

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2000

4 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on People v. Mooney

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1938-09-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*114T. J. Audette, pro. per.

¶2Carl C. Donaugh, U. S. Atty., and M. B. Strayer and J. Mason Dillard, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of Portland, Or.

¶3Before WILBUR, HANEY, and HEA-LY, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6This is an appeal 'from an order denying an application made to the District Court to set aside and vacate a judgment of conviction. The application was made after the time for an appeal had expired. The basis of the application was the claim that the indictment did not state facts sufficient to constitute the public offense of transporting a stolen automobile from one state to another knowing that it was stolen. The indictment was not defective in the failure to state an offense, but, were it so, the application was too late. The remedy for the alleged defect was by an appeal from the judgment. That the application was in form an application for a writ coram nobis did not clothe the court with power to vacate its final judgment. The nature of this writ is discussed by the Supreme Court of California in People v. Mooney, 178 Cal. 525, 174 P. 325, to which we refer.

¶7Judgment affirmed.

/99/f2d/113 · .json · Public domain