Court Opinion

ID: 9446326
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:52:23.790015+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:37.133397
License: Public Domain

BAZELON, Circuit Judge
(concurring in the result).
The allegations of appellant’s motion, even given the liberal construction that I think must be given to papers drafted pro se by a prisoner who is indigent, untutored and uncounselled, do not sufficiently present a ground for vacation of his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The denial of his motion without a hearing was therefore proper.
*413If, having counsel, he should make a legally sufficient allegation that the prosecution knowingly employed perjured testimony at his trial, I would not be prepared to say that the “record” to which my brothers refer conclusively shows that appellant would be entitled to no relief, so that the District Court would be authorized to deny his motion without a hearing. Nor can I assume with my brothers that the record to which they refer was considered by the District Court. The trial proceedings had not been transcribed when the motion was ruled on. Moreover, the District Court did not give the indication that we have said it should give when it denies a § 2255 motion on the ground that the record shows the movant not to be entitled to relief;1 the judge simply wrote the word “denied” across the face of the motion.

. Adams v. United States, 95 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 355, 357, 222 F.2d 45, 48 (1955).