United States v. Grover C. Crowe and William E. Veasey Grover C. Crowe

Third Circuit

United States v. Grover C. Crowe and William E. Veasey Grover C. Crowe

373 F.2d 797, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7145

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 9, 1967

Docket15453_1

StatusPublished

This text of 373 F.2d 797 (United States v. Grover C. Crowe and William E. Veasey Grover C. Crowe) 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. Grover C. Crowe and William E. Veasey Grover C. Crowe, 373 F.2d 797, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7145 (3d Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The appellant and another were named as defendants in a multiple count indictment. The first count.charged them with conspiracy to violate the postal laws, 18 U.S.C.A. § 371, and each of the other counts charged them with the use of the mails in a scheme to defraud, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341. They were arraigned on July 30, 1963, at which time they entered pleas of not guilty. When the indictment was moved for trial, on April 27, 1964, the appellant, represented by counsel, applied to the Court for leave to withdraw his earlier plea of not guilty to the ninth count and to enter a plea of guilty. Leave was granted and the guilty plea was accepted.

On March 18, 1965, the appellant was ordered committed for study and sentenced under § 4208(b) of Title 18 U.S. C.A., the sentence to commence on April 5. When sentence was imposed the Court was under the mistaken impression that the appellant had entered a plea of guilty to the charge of conspiracy and sentenced him accordingly. When the mistake was discovered several days later the sentence was vacated and the appellant was ordered to appear before the Court on April 26, 1965. The appellant, represented by a second attorney, appeared as ordered and moved under rule 32(d) of the Fed.Rules Cr.Proc., 18 U.S. C.A., for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty and to reinstate his plea of not guilty. This motion was later reduced to writing.

After a full evidentiary hearing during which the Court thoroughly explored the grounds urged in support of the motion, it was denied. The appellant was again ordered committed for study and sentenced under § 4208(b) supra. The present appeal is from the denial of the motion made under rule 32(d) supra. We have examined the record and find no reversible error. United States v. Washington, 341 F.2d 277, 281 (3rd Cir. 1965), cert. den. 382 U.S. 850, 86 S.Ct. 96, 15 L.Ed.2d 89; United States v. Sammara, 330 F.2d 1 (3rd Cir. 1964).

The judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The appellant and another were named as defendants in a multiple count indictment. The first count.charged them with conspiracy to violate the postal laws, 18 U.S.C.A. § 371, and each of the other counts charged them with the use of the mails in a scheme to defraud, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341. They were arraigned on July 30, 1963, at which time they entered pleas of not guilty. When the indictment was moved for trial, on April 27, 1964, the appellant, represented by counsel, applied to the Court for leave to withdraw his earlier plea of not guilty to the ninth count and to enter a plea of guilty. Leave was granted and the guilty plea was accepted.

On March 18, 1965, the appellant was ordered committed for study and sentenced under § 4208(b) of Title 18 U.S. C.A., the sentence to commence on April 5. When sentence was imposed the Court was under the mistaken impression that the appellant had entered a plea of guilty to the charge of conspiracy and sentenced him accordingly. When the mistake was discovered several days later the sentence was vacated and the appellant was ordered to appear before the Court on April 26, 1965. The appellant, represented by a second attorney, appeared as ordered and moved under rule 32(d) of the Fed.Rules Cr.Proc., 18 U.S. C.A., for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty and to reinstate his plea of not guilty. This motion was later reduced to writing.

After a full evidentiary hearing during which the Court thoroughly explored the grounds urged in support of the motion, it was denied. The appellant was again ordered committed for study and sentenced under § 4208(b) supra. The present appeal is from the denial of the motion made under rule 32(d) supra. We have examined the record and find no reversible error. United States v. Washington, 341 F.2d 277, 281 (3rd Cir. 1965), cert. den. 382 U.S. 850, 86 S.Ct. 96, 15 L.Ed.2d 89; United States v. Sammara, 330 F.2d 1 (3rd Cir. 1964).

The judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

373 F.2d 797, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-grover-c-crowe-and-william-e-veasey-grover-c-crowe-ca3-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack