Legal Opinion

Richard Ray Credille v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided December 16, 1965No. 8337_1PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant is under three sentences, the first for bank robbery, the second for escape, and the third for perjury. He is now serving the first and does not attack it but does seek relief from the second and third. In such circumstances the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 remedy is not available but coram nobis is. See Williams v. United States, 10 Cir., 267 F.2d 559, 560, certiorari denied 361 U.S. 867, 80 S.Ct. 128, 4 L.Ed.2d 106.

On the escape charge, to which appellant pleaded guilty, the contention is that the evidence is insufficient because the escape was from a local sheriff and a county jail rather…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Diggs v. WelchCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1945
  2. Harold George Hoover v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1959
  3. Lewis Adam v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1960
  4. Leonard J. Williams v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1959

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Clark v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
  2. United States v. SackCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
  3. William Isaac Davis v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1968
  4. State v. Michael HolmesCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API