22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T46b,Convicted under all four counts of a multiple-count indictment, Claude Delbert Beavers moved under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to set aside the sentence imposed under count two. It was his contention that this count of the indictment failed to allege facts sufficient to constitute any cause of action against him and failed to charge any crime punishable under the laws of the United States. The motion was denied by the district court, and Beavers appeals. Count two of the indictment alleges as follows: Title 26 U.S.C. § 5216 (a) (1), referred to in this count, reads in part: Beavers argues that the words “not duly authorized according to law,” as used in count two, are insufficient to allege criminal conduct punishable under the laws of the United States “because nowhere is it alleged what law the conduct alleged was unauthorized by or in what respect such conduct was contrary to such law.” For the reasons stated in the memorandum and order of the district judge, entered on May 20, 1960, United States v. Allison, 191 F.Supp. 443 , we are of the opinion that appellant’s contention is without merit. Affirmed.24:T48b,

Convicted under all four counts of a multiple-count indictment, Claude Delbert Beavers moved under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to set aside the sentence imposed under count two. It was his contention that this count of the indictment failed to allege facts sufficient to constitute any cause of action against him and failed to charge any crime punishable under the laws of the United States. The motion was denied by the district court, and Beavers appeals.

Count two of the indictment alleges as follows:

Title 26 U.S.C. § 5216 (a) (1), referred to in this count, reads in part:

Beavers argues that the words “not duly authorized according to law,” as used in count two, are insufficient to allege criminal conduct punishable under the laws of the United States “because nowhere is it alleged what law the conduct alleged was unauthorized by or in what respect such conduct was contrary to such law.”

For the reasons stated in the memorandum and order of the district judge, entered on May 20, 1960, United States v. Allison, 191 F.Supp. 443 , we are of the opinion that appellant’s contention is without merit.

Affirmed.