Summary
finding that § 2255 motion may not raise questions that were fully considered on appeal
Summary of this case from United States v. BaumgardnerOpinion
No. 7089.
Argued November 7, 1955.
Decided November 9, 1955.
Percy William Herman, pro se.
James R. Moore, First Asst. U.S. Atty., Richmond, Va. (L.S. Parsons, Jr., U.S. Atty., Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellee.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, DOBIE, Circuit Judge, and BARKSDALE, District Judge.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence of the court below affirmed by this court in Herman v. United States, 4 Cir., 220 F.2d 219. The motion raised no questions which were not fully considered on the appeal from the judgment and sentence. Furthermore, the grounds of the motion were matters which could have been presented only by appeal and not by motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Affirmed.