United States v. Clifford Charles Seib, Jr.

Third Circuit

United States v. Clifford Charles Seib, Jr.

439 F.2d 1135, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11161

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 24, 1971

Docket19526_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 439 F.2d 1135 (United States v. Clifford Charles Seib, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Clifford Charles Seib, Jr., 439 F.2d 1135, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11161 (3d Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Prior to the 1966 amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3568 the appellant was sentenced, following a guilty plea, to seven years imprisonment for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b). The maximum sentence for that offense is ten years. On September 18, 1970 he moved before the sentencing judge pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Crim.P. for reduction or correction of his sentence to reflect credit for 74 days spent in custody prior to the imposition of sentence. That motion was denied and this appeal followed. The precise situation has heretofore been presented in Amato v. United States, 374 F.2d 36 (3 Cir. 1967), which held that denial of a motion to reduce a pre-1966 sentence of less than the maximum by crediting time in pre-sentence custody was not error. 1

The order of the district court will be affirmed.

1

. Accord, United States v. Whitfield, 411 F.2d 545 (8 Cir. 1969); Schreter v. United States, 265 F.Supp. 369 (D.N.J. 1967). Contra, United States v. Smith, 379 F.2d 628 (7 Cir. 1967). Cf. Sobell v. United States, 407 F.2d 180 (2 Cir. 1969); Lee v. United States, 400 F.2d 185 (9 Cir. 1968); United States v. Jones, 393 F.2d 728 (6 Cir. 1968); Bryans v. Blackwell, 387 F.2d 764 (5 Cir. 1967); Dunn v. United States, 376 F.2d 191 (4 Cir. 1967); Stapf v. United States, 125 U.S.App.D.C. 100, 367 F.2d 326 (1966).

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Prior to the 1966 amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3568 the appellant was sentenced, following a guilty plea, to seven years imprisonment for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b). The maximum sentence for that offense is ten years. On September 18, 1970 he moved before the sentencing judge pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Crim.P. for reduction or correction of his sentence to reflect credit for 74 days spent in custody prior to the imposition of sentence. That motion was denied and this appeal followed. The precise situation has heretofore been presented in Amato v. United States, 374 F.2d 36 (3 Cir. 1967), which held that denial of a motion to reduce a pre-1966 sentence of less than the maximum by crediting time in pre-sentence custody was not error. 1

The order of the district court will be affirmed.

1

. Accord, United States v. Whitfield, 411 F.2d 545 (8 Cir. 1969); Schreter v. United States, 265 F.Supp. 369 (D.N.J. 1967). Contra, United States v. Smith, 379 F.2d 628 (7 Cir. 1967). Cf. Sobell v. United States, 407 F.2d 180 (2 Cir. 1969); Lee v. United States, 400 F.2d 185 (9 Cir. 1968); United States v. Jones, 393 F.2d 728 (6 Cir. 1968); Bryans v. Blackwell, 387 F.2d 764 (5 Cir. 1967); Dunn v. United States, 376 F.2d 191 (4 Cir. 1967); Stapf v. United States, 125 U.S.App.D.C. 100, 367 F.2d 326 (1966).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

439 F.2d 1135, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-clifford-charles-seib-jr-ca3-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack