United States v. Falu

421 F.2d 687
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedDecember 18, 1969
DocketNo. 367, Docket 33954
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 421 F.2d 687 (United States v. Falu) 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
United States v. Falu, 421 F.2d 687 (2d Cir. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We affirm Judge Cooper’s denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of Falu’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his sentence for breaking into mail boxes in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708, on the ground that he was under the influence of drugs at the times of plea and sentence. Judge Tyler had exercised great care in taking the plea; Falu admitted that there was a factual basis for this and specifically declared that he was not sick. Four weeks, during which he received no narcotic or addicting drugs, elapsed between plea and sentence, before Judge Cooper, at which Falu declined to exercise his right of allocution. On both occasions he was represented by highly experienced and capable counsel.

Affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Lloyd
507 A.2d 992 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1986)
Edward W. Newfield v. United States
565 F.2d 203 (Second Circuit, 1977)
Riccardi v. United States
428 F. Supp. 1059 (E.D. New York, 1977)
United States v. Raymond Miranda
437 F.2d 1255 (Second Circuit, 1971)
Miranda v. United States
325 F. Supp. 217 (S.D. New York, 1970)
United States v. Ramon E. Falu
421 F.2d 687 (Second Circuit, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
421 F.2d 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-falu-ca2-1969.