Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States of America Ex Rel. Edward C. Behm v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, 371 F.2d 1016, 3rd Cir. (1967)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the denial of a state prisoner's petition for habeas corpus. The prisoner claimed he pleaded guilty without the constitutionally required benefit of counsel, but the record supported the lower court's finding against the prisoner on the disputed factual issues concerning the appointment and conduct of counsel. While affirming the judgment, the Court noted its disapproval of the appellee's counsel failing to file a brief or appendix that could have aided consideration of the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1967-02-20 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 371 F.2d 1016 Docket: 16011_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 Third Circuit affirmed the denial of a state prisoner's petition for habeas corpus. The prisoner claimed he pleaded guilty without the constitutionally required benefit of counsel, but the record supported the lower court's finding against the prisoner on the disputed factual issues concerning the appointment and conduct of counsel. While affirming the judgment, the Court noted its disapproval of the appellee's counsel failing to file a brief or appendix that could have aided consideration of the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    United States of America Ex Rel. Edward C. Behm v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, 371 F.2d 1016, 3rd Cir. (1967)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the denial of a state prisoner's petition for habeas corpus. The prisoner claimed he pleaded guilty without the constitutionally required benefit of counsel, but the record supported the lower court's finding against the prisoner on the disputed factual issues concerning the appointment and conduct of counsel. While affirming the judgment, the Court noted its disapproval of the appellee's counsel failing to file a brief or appendix that could have aided consideration of the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    371 F.

    2d 1016

    UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Edward C. BEHM,


    Appellant,
    v.
    Harry E. RUSSELL, Superintendent State Correctional
    Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania.
    No. 16011.

    United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.


    Submitted February 6, 1967.
    Decided February 20, 1967.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of
    Pennsylvania; Frederick V. Follmer, Judge.
    Edward C. Behm, pro se.
    Amos Davis, Dist. Atty., Hollidaysburg, Pa., for appellee.
    Before HASTIE, FORMAN and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    PER CURIAM.

    The appellant, a state prisoner, has appealed from the denial of his petition for
    habeas corpus. His principal contention is that he pleaded guilty without the
    constitutionally essential benefit of counsel. With adequate justification in the
    record, the disputed factual issues concerning the appointment and conduct of
    counsel have been decided against the appellant. Accordingly, the collateral
    attack upon his conviction fails.

    The court notes with disapproval the failure of counsel for the appellee to file a
    brief and an appendix which might have facilitated our consideration of this
    appeal.

    The judgment will be affirmed.

    The judgment will be affirmed.

    You might also like