From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carte v. Taylor

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jun 22, 1965
347 F.2d 364 (10th Cir. 1965)

Opinion

No. 8051.

June 22, 1965.

William Alva Carte, pro se.

Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U.S. Atty., Topeka, Kan. (Newell A. George, U.S. Atty., Topeka, Kan., with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, LEWIS and SETH, Circuit Judges.


This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, dismissing, without a hearing, Carte's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Carte was sentenced in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri and is serving his sentence in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. The petition alleges only that the sentence is void because of ambiguity. The remedy provided for in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is exclusive unless it is shown to be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of the detention. Barkan v. United States, 10 Cir., 341 F.2d 95; Oughton v. United States, 10 Cir., 310 F.2d 803, cert. denied 373 U.S. 937, 83 S. Ct. 1542, 10 L.Ed.2d 693; Sanchez v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 302 F.2d 725, cert. denied 371 U.S. 864, 83 S.Ct. 124, 9 L.Ed.2d 101; Black v. United States, 10 Cir., 301 F.2d 418, cert. denied 370 U.S. 932, 82 S.Ct. 1618, 8 L.Ed.2d 832; Martin v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 296 F.2d 739.

There being no allegations in the petition which indicate that the remedy provided for in Section 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of the prisoner's detention, there was no error in dismissing the petition without a hearing.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Carte v. Taylor

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jun 22, 1965
347 F.2d 364 (10th Cir. 1965)
Case details for

Carte v. Taylor

Case Details

Full title:William Alva CARTE, Appellant, v. John C. TAYLOR, Warden, United States…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Jun 22, 1965

Citations

347 F.2d 364 (10th Cir. 1965)

Citing Cases

McDowell v. Willingham

The matters of which he now complains have either been conclusively litigated in the Circuit of his…

McDowell v. Moseley

4. The remedy by way of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 being as broad as habeas corpus (Kaufman v. United States, 394…