Richard Lavoie v. United States

First Circuit

Richard Lavoie v. United States

310 F.2d 117, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3539

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedNovember 21, 1962

Docket6044_1

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 310 F.2d 117 (Richard Lavoie v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Richard Lavoie v. United States, 310 F.2d 117, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3539 (1st Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant-appellant while serving a state sentence in a Massachusetts Correctional Institution escaped, stole a car, kidnapped a correctional official and fled to another state. He was there apprehended by an agent of the F.B.I. and returned to Massachusetts, where he was held in default of bail and tried in the district court. Following conviction he was sentenced, “said prison sentence to begin upon release from State custody upon sentence now being served under order of State Court.” He now appeals from an order of the district court denying a motion under Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, for correction of sentence nunc pro tunc.

There is no impropriety in the imposition of a sentence to commence on and after a state court sentence presently being served. Zahn v. Kipp, 7 Cir., 1955, 218 F.2d 898; Hayden v. Warden, United States Penitentiary, McNeil Island, 9 Cir., 1941, 124 F.2d 514. Defendant’s sole point is that because of his escape and apprehension by federal officials he was not technically in state custody, and that this situation constitutes an exception to the general principle. Even if defendant’s premise is accurate, the conclusion is not. Cf. Taylor v. Baker, 10 Cir., 1960, 284 F.2d 43, cert. den. 365 U. S. 814, 81 S.Ct. 695, 5 L.Ed.2d 693, and cases cited.

Judgment will be entered affirming the order of the District Court.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant-appellant while serving a state sentence in a Massachusetts Correctional Institution escaped, stole a car, kidnapped a correctional official and fled to another state. He was there apprehended by an agent of the F.B.I. and returned to Massachusetts, where he was held in default of bail and tried in the district court. Following conviction he was sentenced, “said prison sentence to begin upon release from State custody upon sentence now being served under order of State Court.” He now appeals from an order of the district court denying a motion under Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, for correction of sentence nunc pro tunc.

There is no impropriety in the imposition of a sentence to commence on and after a state court sentence presently being served. Zahn v. Kipp, 7 Cir., 1955, 218 F.2d 898; Hayden v. Warden, United States Penitentiary, McNeil Island, 9 Cir., 1941, 124 F.2d 514. Defendant’s sole point is that because of his escape and apprehension by federal officials he was not technically in state custody, and that this situation constitutes an exception to the general principle. Even if defendant’s premise is accurate, the conclusion is not. Cf. Taylor v. Baker, 10 Cir., 1960, 284 F.2d 43, cert. den. 365 U. S. 814, 81 S.Ct. 695, 5 L.Ed.2d 693, and cases cited.

Judgment will be entered affirming the order of the District Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

310 F.2d 117, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-lavoie-v-united-states-ca1-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack