Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Larry Charles Clonce v. United States, 432 F.2d 442, 10th Cir. (1970)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views1 page
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Charles Clonce in a per curiam opinion. Clonce was informed that the appellate court was considering summarily affirming the lower court's decision due to the unsubstantial issue presented. Clonce opposed summary affirmation without addressing the merits of the underlying case. Upon thorough consideration of the full case record, the appellate court determined that the district court's February 25, 1970 order denying relief was correct.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1970-10-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 432 F.2d 442 Docket: 233-70_1

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Charles Clonce in a per curiam opinion. Clonce was informed that the appellate court was considering summarily affirming the lower court's decision due to the unsubstantial issue presented. Clonce opposed summary affirmation without addressing the merits of the underlying case. Upon thorough consideration of the full case record, the appellate court determined that the district court's February 25, 1970 order denying relief was correct.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    5 views1 page

    Larry Charles Clonce v. United States, 432 F.2d 442, 10th Cir. (1970)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Charles Clonce in a per curiam opinion. Clonce was informed that the appellate court was considering summarily affirming the lower court's decision due to the unsubstantial issue presented. Clonce opposed summary affirmation without addressing the merits of the underlying case. Upon thorough consideration of the full case record, the appellate court determined that the district court's February 25, 1970 order denying relief was correct.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    432 F.

    2d 442

    Larry Charles CLONCE, Appellant,


    v.
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
    No. 233-70.

    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.


    Oct. 5, 1970.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of
    Oklahoma, 317 F.Supp. 650.
    Nathan G. Graham, U.S. Atty., for appellee.
    Larry Charles Clonce, pro se.
    Before LEWIS, Chief Judge, PICKETT, Circuit Judge, and KERR,
    District judge.
    PER CURIAM.

    Clonce was informed that the court was contemplating summary affirmance of
    the district court judgment because of the unsubstantial issue presented for our
    decision. He opposed the assignment without addressing the underlying merits
    and we granted him an additional period of time to submit further papers which
    he has now done.

    We have thoroughly considered the files and record in this cause and are
    convinced that the judgment of the district court was correct.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court order of
    February 25, 1970, 317 F.Supp. 650, denying relief.

    You might also like