Legal Opinion
Leroy Friedman v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided February 1, 1979No. 78-1663PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Per curiam
As is only natural where a supplicant has little to lose but everything to gain, post-conviction relief motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 are as often as not marked by the deceit born of self-interest as by substantial claims of injustice. We sympathize with the problems that our District Courts encounter in attempting to separate the wheat from the chaff in dealing with the daily flow of such motions. Nonetheless, the statute commands the District Courts to grant a prompt hearing on all motions brought pursuant to it “[ujnless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- MacHibroda v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Edward Morgan MacKenna v. O. B. Ellis, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1960
- Raymond L. Buckelew and James Laney Jenkins v. United States of America, Judson Lee Drane v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Wilbert Herring v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Robert Louis Porter v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- United States v. CavittCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. Nicholas, ConnieCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- United States v. Gaetanino PolselliCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
- James G. Davis v. State of AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- United States v. Susan Carol BriggsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.