Hurst v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
PHILLIPS, Chief Judge.
These are appeals from orders denying motions made under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, to vacate sentences of imprisonment.
Doll and Hurst were tried and convicted on an indictment charging a violation of 12 U.S.C.A. § 588b, [now 18 U.S.C.A. § 2113] and each was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five years. Neither appealed from his judgment of conviction and the time for appeal had expired when the motions to vacate were filed.
During the trial, the United States sought to introduce in evidence written statements, one signed by Doll and the other by Hurst. Doll and Hurst…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Sunal v. LargeSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Sunal v. LargeSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Taylor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
- Howell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
- Moore v. AderholdCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Austin v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1964
- Arthur J. Porth v. The Hon. George Templar and the United States of America, United States of America v. Arthur J. PorthCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1971
- Barnes v. Hunter, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
- United States v. EdwardsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1957
- Hahn v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.