Gasper Joseph Gulizio v. United States

Second Circuit

Gasper Joseph Gulizio v. United States

311 F.2d 639, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3312

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedDecember 17, 1962

Docket27132_1

StatusPublished

This text of 311 F.2d 639 (Gasper Joseph Gulizio v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gasper Joseph Gulizio v. United States, 311 F.2d 639, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3312 (2d Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pleaded guilty to a charge that in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 659 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 he possessed stolen property. When sentenced upon this plea the sentencing judge failed to ask appellant if he had anything to say before sentence was pronounced, as required by Rule 32 (a) Fed.R.Crim.Proc. Appellant, however, at the time of sentence was represented by counsel and his counsel spoke in his behalf. Appellant, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 moved to vacate his sentence. The district court denied the motion and denied a motion for reargument, but granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

We affirm, Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424, 82 S.Ct. 468, 7 L.Ed.2d 417 (1962); Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 82 S.Ct. 510, 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962); United States v. Donovan (Andrews), 301 F.2d 376 (2 Cir. 1962), petitions for writs of cert. granted, Oct. 8, 1962, Andrews v. United States, 371 U.S. 812, 83 S.Ct. 57. (1962)

*640 However, this affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant if, in the event of a change of circumstances, he shall be advised to bring another petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pleaded guilty to a charge that in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 659 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 he possessed stolen property. When sentenced upon this plea the sentencing judge failed to ask appellant if he had anything to say before sentence was pronounced, as required by Rule 32 (a) Fed.R.Crim.Proc. Appellant, however, at the time of sentence was represented by counsel and his counsel spoke in his behalf. Appellant, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 moved to vacate his sentence. The district court denied the motion and denied a motion for reargument, but granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

We affirm, Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424, 82 S.Ct. 468, 7 L.Ed.2d 417 (1962); Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 82 S.Ct. 510, 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962); United States v. Donovan (Andrews), 301 F.2d 376 (2 Cir. 1962), petitions for writs of cert. granted, Oct. 8, 1962, Andrews v. United States, 371 U.S. 812, 83 S.Ct. 57. (1962)

*640 However, this affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant if, in the event of a change of circumstances, he shall be advised to bring another petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

311 F.2d 639, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gasper-joseph-gulizio-v-united-states-ca2-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack