Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

99 F.2d 757

Docket No. 8825.

Verheul v. Johnston

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Nov. 7, 1938.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 2, 1938.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1938-11-07

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 1969

2 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Hall v. Johnston · Ex parte Melendez · Smith v. Johnston

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1938-11-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Ernest Verheul, in pro. per.

¶2Frank J. Hennessy, U. S. Atty., and R. B. McMillan and A. J. Zirpoli, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of San 'Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before WILBUR, DENMAN, and HEALY, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURTAM.

¶5This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus. Appellant was indicted for bank robbery committed January 5, 1935, and after plea of guilty was sentenced, on May 31, 1935, to a term of twenty-five years imprisonment. He contends that the indictment stated an offense under the Act of May 18, 1934, ch. 304, 48 Stat. 783, sec. 2(a), 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subd. (a), which fixes the maximum penalty at twenty years, and not under subdivision (b), id. sec. 2(b), 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subd. (b), which fixes the maximum penalty at twenty-five years. The sentence authorized by 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, subdivision (a) (20 years) not having expired, the application is premature. Smith v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 83 F.2d 321; Hall v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 86 F.2d 820; Ex parte Mhlendez, 9 Cir., 98 F.2d 791.

¶6Order affirmed.

/99/f2d/757 · .json · Public domain