James E. Lofland v. United States

Lofland was convicted of one offense proscribed by 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and three offenses proscribed by 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . His appeal to our court was unsuccessful. Lofland v. United States, 357 F.2d 472 (9th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1026 , 87 S.Ct. 755 , 17 L.Ed.2d 675 (1967). Thereafter, he filed a motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , attacking the judgments of conviction. The District Court denied the motion without having conducted an evidentiary hearing, and Lofland appeals.

As we understand Lofland’s claims, presented in papers apparently prepared by himself, they are three: (1) That he was illegally arrested in the beginning, his arrest having followed an illegal entry into his place of dwelling. (2) That a search and seizure conducted by police officers, after their alleged illegal entry, was constitutionally impermissible. (3) That the arresting officers improperly deprived Lofland of his right to consult with counsel.

In our court’s original opinion, the first two questions presented by Lofland were considered, discussed, and rejected. 357 F.2d at 476, 477 . The third contention was also discussed by our court but not with respect to Escobedo v. Illinois, 378…