Howard Vincent Perno v. United States

245 F.2d 60
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 11, 1957
Docket15367
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 245 F.2d 60 (Howard Vincent Perno v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Howard Vincent Perno v. United States, 245 F.2d 60 (9th Cir. 1957).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals to this court from an adverse ruling of the district court under what was essentially a determination in a proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He also asks for a writ to bring himself before this court.

We have examined all of his papers. No useful purpose would be served by appellant appearing before us. Counsel for the government waived in this court oral argument in behalf of the government. Appellant has no flat right to appear in this type of proceeding. Most of appellant’s points are those which he could have made on appeal, if he had taken one, but he cannot put them in under a § 2255 proceeding.

Primarily, the appellant’s grievance concerns the severity of his sentence. His was, in the main, a narcotics case, although there was a conviction on an assault count too. We find the sentence to be a “stiff” one, but within the limits accorded the trial judge by statute. Also, appellant makes some attack on his self-chosen counsel at the trial. We do interpolate that from our examination this attack hardly seems fair.

An extended opinion here does not seem justified. The brief of the attorney for the government appears to be a fair presentation. In detail that brief explains why, in the present posture of the case we can do nothing for the appellant, Perno.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Laurence Fredrick Anthony v. United States
331 F.2d 687 (Ninth Circuit, 1964)
Louis Fiano v. United States
291 F.2d 113 (Ninth Circuit, 1961)
Amos Black v. United States
269 F.2d 38 (Ninth Circuit, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
245 F.2d 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-vincent-perno-v-united-states-ca9-1957.