From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fitts v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 17, 1967
376 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1967)

Opinion

No. 9176.

April 17, 1967.

Jerry J. Miller, Olathe, Kan., for appellant.

Newell A. George, U.S. Atty., and Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U.S. Atty., for appellee.

Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, HILL, Circuit Judge, and EUBANKS, District Judge.


The appellant, John Thomas Fitts, was on February 7, 1964, convicted by a jury in the District of Kansas of violating the Dyer Act. On March 16, 1964, he was sentenced to serve four years with the sentence to run concurrently with a sentence previously imposed in another district. This court has affirmed the conviction (Fitts v. United States, 335 F.2d 1021, cert. denied 379 U.S. 979, 85 S.Ct. 682, 13 L.Ed.2d 569). Fitts next filed motion to vacate sentence and/or petition for writ of habeas corpus which was denied and such denial affirmed by this court. (Fitts v. Willingham, 359 F.2d 790).

In the instant proceeding appellant contends that since he was sentenced on March 16, 1964, made election not to commence serving the sentence on March 31, 1964, and being in custody during the interim, he is entitled to credit on his sentence for this two weeks under Rule 38 F.R.Crim.P. It was brought to our attention during argument and is undisputed that appellant has been given credit for this time.

The second contention made by Fitts is that he should be allowed an additional credit on his sentence of two weeks because his first election not to commence serving his sentence, though written and witnessed, was not properly notarized. This point was not briefed and was not presented to the court below so will not be considered here.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Fitts v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 17, 1967
376 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1967)
Case details for

Fitts v. United States

Case Details

Full title:John Thomas FITTS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Apr 17, 1967

Citations

376 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1967)

Citing Cases

United States v. Montgomery

It is well settled that if an appellant fails to alert the trial court of claimed error, the issue cannot be…

United States v. Hubbard

This court has often applied the general rule that if an appellant fails to alert the trial court to claimed…