Unusual as is issuance of the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus,1 rarer still is the classic § 2255 unlawful sentence. The confused record in this case, however, indicates that Defendant apparently has been sentenced to a longer term than the statute allows. Accordingly, we vacate and remand the District Court’s order denying § 2255 relief for further appropriate proceedings.
Defendant was convicted on his pleas of guilty to post office burglary and possession of stolen money orders, violations of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2115 2 and 641. Importantly, Count I of the indictment encompassed the § 2115 violation, while Count II involved the § 641 charge. The transcript of the sentencing hearing held on February 13,1967 contains the following crucial language: “The Court sentences you to ten years in the penitentiary on Count One, and the other counts, one year; all counts to run concurrently; and so all of your years will run concurrent with your ten year sentence.”
Thus, it appears that Defendant has been sentenced to ten years for violating 18 U.S.C.A. § 2115, since that was Count One of the indictment. The maximum sentence allowable under § 2115 is five years.
Of course, the transcript may be in error. The formal written judgment of conviction and sentence signed the same day the sentencing hearing was held states that the ten year sentence is assessed for Count Two, and that the one year sentence is under Count One. As there is a variation between the oral sentence and the written judgment3we vacate and remand the *1102ease for hearing and Findings of Fact regarding the term of the sentence orally 4 pronounced, and for resentencing to the extent appropriate and permissible.
Vacated and remanded.