ALEXANDER MORRIS, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court correctly held it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a habeas corpus petition when the remedy under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was not shown to be inadequate or ineffective.
Defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter, had his sentence denied reduction, and successive motions to vacate the sentence under § 2255 were denied. H…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Vacate Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Upon an indictment for second degree murder in the District Court for the District of Columbia, defendant, with the advice of counsel, entered a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of manslaughter. The plea was accepted and the defendant was duly sentenced. Subsequently, defendant filed a motion to have the sentence reduced and several successive motions under § 2255 (28 U.S.C.A. § 2255) to vacate the sentence. All of such motions having been denied, an appeal was taken from the denial of the last one. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit gave careful consideration to all of the grounds advanced in aid of the several motions and affirmed the denial of the motions. See Morris v. United States, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 296, 248 F. 2d 618.
The defendant, being now confined in Lorton Reformatory, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. As we said in Lampe v. Clemmer, 4 Cir., 251 F. 2d 465 :
“ * * * The District Judge properly held that he was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition as there was no showing that the remedy provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2255 would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of petitioner’s detention. Bozell v. Welch, 4 Cir., 203 F. 2d 711; Meyers v. Welch, 4 Cir., 179 F. 2d 707, 708.”
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hunt v. United States, 301 F.2d 663 (4th Cir. 1962)
Authorities Cited
- Meyers v. Welch, 179 F.2d 707 (4th Cir. 1950)
- Bozell v. Welch, 203 F.2d 711 (4th Cir. 1953)
- Morris v. United States, 248 F.2d 618 (D.C. Cir. 1957)
- Virgil v. Lampe, 251 F.2d 465 (4th Cir. 1958)