Frank Vuono v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Frank Vuono v. United States

441 F.2d 271, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10672

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 16, 1971

Docket15081_1

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 441 F.2d 271 (Frank Vuono v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frank Vuono v. United States, 441 F.2d 271, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10672 (4th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Frank Vuono is presently serving three concurrent sentences for robbing a savings and loan institution in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113. He has filed a motion for vacation of sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. As is customary, the motion is now pending before the same *272 District Judge who presided over the jury trial which resulted in the three convictions at issue in the 2255 motion. This appeal is taken from the denial of Vuono’s motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144 to transfer the case to another judge on the ground that the present judge is biased and prejudiced.

The ruling appealed from is clearly interlocutory in nature and not appropriate for review prior to final action by the District Court on the underlying cause of action. As the Second Circuit has stated with regard to this precise issue, “[a] determination of a District Judge not to disqualify himself is ordinarily reviewable only upon appeal from a final decision on the cause in which the application by affidavit was filed.” Dubnoff v. Goldstein, 385 F.2d 717, 721 (2nd Cir. 1967); accord, Rosen v. Sugarman, 357 F.2d 794 (2nd Cir. 1966); Albert v. United States District Court for Western District of Michigan, Northern Division, 283 F.2d 61 (6th Cir. 1960); Green v. Murphy, 259 F.2d 591 (3rd Cir. 1958).

Accordingly, the appeal is

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Frank Vuono is presently serving three concurrent sentences for robbing a savings and loan institution in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113. He has filed a motion for vacation of sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. As is customary, the motion is now pending before the same *272 District Judge who presided over the jury trial which resulted in the three convictions at issue in the 2255 motion. This appeal is taken from the denial of Vuono’s motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144 to transfer the case to another judge on the ground that the present judge is biased and prejudiced.

The ruling appealed from is clearly interlocutory in nature and not appropriate for review prior to final action by the District Court on the underlying cause of action. As the Second Circuit has stated with regard to this precise issue, “[a] determination of a District Judge not to disqualify himself is ordinarily reviewable only upon appeal from a final decision on the cause in which the application by affidavit was filed.” Dubnoff v. Goldstein, 385 F.2d 717, 721 (2nd Cir. 1967); accord, Rosen v. Sugarman, 357 F.2d 794 (2nd Cir. 1966); Albert v. United States District Court for Western District of Michigan, Northern Division, 283 F.2d 61 (6th Cir. 1960); Green v. Murphy, 259 F.2d 591 (3rd Cir. 1958).

Accordingly, the appeal is

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

441 F.2d 271, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-vuono-v-united-states-ca4-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack