Court Opinion

ID: 9455321
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 19:18:43.588753+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:34:33.226441
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
This appeal is taken from an order of the District Court denying the motion of a federal convict to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. We affirm.1
Chambers is serving a fifteen-year sentence for bank robbery, a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2113(a). He was convicted on his plea of guilty, entered with the advice of counsel. In his § 2255 motion to vacate and .on appeal he alleges several grounds for relief, including that the sentencing court, the Northern District of Texas, was without jurisdiction because the offense was committed in the Eastern District of Texas; that the Government failed to show requisite evidence to constitute the offense; and that he “has been convicted in jeopardy” of the offense charged in the indictment. The District Court found from examining the record that Chambers had signed a Consent to Transfer Venue, pursuant to Rule 20, F.R.Crim.P. The court found from a transcript of the arraignment proceedings that Chambers affirmatively acknowledged the factual resume read by the United States Attorney which constituted the offense to which Chambers pled guilty. The court below further found that that was the first and only time Chambers had been charged with that offense.
All of these findings are supported by the record and we cannot say that any of them are clearly erroneous. Fed.R. Civ.P., rule 52(a). Though sometimes difficult to fathom, we have considered Chambers’ other contentions and find them to be without merit.
The judgment of the District Court is Affirmed.

. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526, Part I.