Case Name: Carroll M. JENKINS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1957-08-22
Citations: 249 F.2d 105
Docket Number: No. 13781
Parties: Carroll M. JENKINS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 249
Pages: 105–106

Head Matter:
Carroll M. JENKINS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 13781.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued June 27, 1957.
Decided Aug. 22, 1957.
Mr. Cecil A. Beasley, Jr., Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. R. J. Shortlidge, Jr., Washington, D. C. (both appointed by this Court) was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. Nathan J. Paulson, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Edward P. Troxell, Principal Asst. U. S. Atty., and Lewis Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and FAHY and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence in Criminal Case No. 1031-53. The District Court denied this motion without a hearing, on the ground that "The motions, the files and the records of the case conclusively demonstrate that the prisoner is entitled to no relief."
We think appellant's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel required a hearing, particularly because it may appear that appellant's interests conflicted with the interests of co-defendants who were represented by the same counsel. Cf. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 75-76, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680. Moreover, when appellant appeared for sentencing no one was afforded an opportunity to make a statement in his behalf as required by Rule 32(a), F.R.Crim.P. [18 U.S.C.]. It is immaterial that counsel said he had "nothing further to add" to what he had previously said, in appellant's absence, at the time co-defendants were sentenced. The appellant was entitled to have a statement "made in open court and in his presence." Gadsden v. United States, 96 U.S.App.D.C. 162, 166, 223 F.2d 627, 631. Appellant must therefore be resentenced even if the hearing discloses no ground for further relief.
Vacated and remanded.