United States v. John Cortez White, No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar. (1) Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409

Fifth Circuit

United States v. John Cortez White, No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar. (1) Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409

447 F.2d 493

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 1, 1971

Docket493

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 447 F.2d 493 (United States v. John Cortez White, No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar. (1) Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. John Cortez White, No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar. (1) Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, 447 F.2d 493 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

447 F.2d 493

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John Cortez WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar.*
*(1) Rule 18, 5 Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc.
v.
Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431
F.2d 409.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 1, 1971.

Irving Silver, Feibelman & Silver, Mobile, Ala., for defendant-appellant.

C. S. White-Spunner, Jr., U.S. Atty., Irwin W. Coleman, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BELL, AINSWORTH, and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of (1) robbing a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 2113(a), and (2) assaulting and putting in jeopardy the lives of persons by use of a dangerous weapon while committing the bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 2113(d). He was sentenced to twenty years under the (a) count and to twenty-five years under the (d) count, to run concurrently. On and remanded for the District Court to appeal, we vacated the two sentences enter a single sentence. United States v. White, 5 Cir., 1971, 436 F.2d 1380.

On remand, appellant was resentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment on the conviction under 2113(d). The sentence on the conviction under 2113(a) was vacated. See Eakes v. United States, 5 Cir., 1968, 391 F.2d 287. The present appeal is from the judgment resentencing appellant.

( 2) Appellant argues that the district court committed error in failing to require a new jury trial, rather than merely resentencing him as stated. This contention is without merit. In fact, it was specifically rejected in United States v. White, 5 Cir., 1971, 440 F.2d 978.

Appellant also urges that his sentence was too harsh and that we should modify it. In Zaffarano v. Blackwell, 5 Cir., 1967, 383 F.2d 719, 721, we said:

'This Court is without power to modify a sentence which was legally imposed and within the bounds prescribed by statute.'

Thus this contention is also without merit.

Affirmed.

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

447 F.2d 493

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John Cortez WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 71-1687 Summary Calendar.*
*(1) Rule 18, 5 Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc.
v.
Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431
F.2d 409.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 1, 1971.

Irving Silver, Feibelman & Silver, Mobile, Ala., for defendant-appellant.

C. S. White-Spunner, Jr., U.S. Atty., Irwin W. Coleman, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BELL, AINSWORTH, and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of (1) robbing a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 2113(a), and (2) assaulting and putting in jeopardy the lives of persons by use of a dangerous weapon while committing the bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 2113(d). He was sentenced to twenty years under the (a) count and to twenty-five years under the (d) count, to run concurrently. On and remanded for the District Court to appeal, we vacated the two sentences enter a single sentence. United States v. White, 5 Cir., 1971, 436 F.2d 1380.

On remand, appellant was resentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment on the conviction under 2113(d). The sentence on the conviction under 2113(a) was vacated. See Eakes v. United States, 5 Cir., 1968, 391 F.2d 287. The present appeal is from the judgment resentencing appellant.

( 2) Appellant argues that the district court committed error in failing to require a new jury trial, rather than merely resentencing him as stated. This contention is without merit. In fact, it was specifically rejected in United States v. White, 5 Cir., 1971, 440 F.2d 978.

Appellant also urges that his sentence was too harsh and that we should modify it. In Zaffarano v. Blackwell, 5 Cir., 1967, 383 F.2d 719, 721, we said:

'This Court is without power to modify a sentence which was legally imposed and within the bounds prescribed by statute.'

Thus this contention is also without merit.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

447 F.2d 493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-cortez-white-no-71-1687-summary-calendar-1-rule-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack