Orville Steptoe v. United States
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellant contends and appellee does not question that this appeal from denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate a sentence for robbery should be treated as a direct appeal from the conviction, on the basis that notice of appeal was timely filed and subsequent delay was due to excusable neglect. We assume, without deciding, that this is correct. Cf. Blunt v. United States, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 266, 244 F.2d 355; Ramsour v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. -, 280 F.2d 57. We find no error affecting substantial rights.
Affirmed.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thomas E. Blunt v. United States of America, Thomas E. Blunt v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
- Robert L. Ramsour v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clifton C. Johnson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1961