United States v. Pedro Muniz

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Pedro Muniz

571 F.2d 1344, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11483

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 26, 1978

Docket77-3522

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 571 F.2d 1344 (United States v. Pedro Muniz) 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. Pedro Muniz, 571 F.2d 1344, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11483 (5th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Pedro Muniz, a federal prisoner, has appealed from the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce his sentence, which was filed pursuant to Rule 35, F.R.Crim.P. In his said motion, appellant has not alleged facts which would indicate either that he received an illegal sentence or that the trial court grossly abused its discretion in imposing the sentence. Accordingly, the district court did not err in denying relief summarily. United States v. Yates, 5 Cir. 1977, 553 F.2d 502.

Appellant has alleged in this Court, but not in the district court, that his guilty plea was wrongfully induced. We will not decide the merits of this contention because it never has been presented to the district court. Elrod v. United States, 5 Cir. 1974, 503 F.2d 959; Chunn v. Clark, 5 Cir. 1971, 451 F.2d 1005.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Pedro Muniz, a federal prisoner, has appealed from the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce his sentence, which was filed pursuant to Rule 35, F.R.Crim.P. In his said motion, appellant has not alleged facts which would indicate either that he received an illegal sentence or that the trial court grossly abused its discretion in imposing the sentence. Accordingly, the district court did not err in denying relief summarily. United States v. Yates, 5 Cir. 1977, 553 F.2d 502.

Appellant has alleged in this Court, but not in the district court, that his guilty plea was wrongfully induced. We will not decide the merits of this contention because it never has been presented to the district court. Elrod v. United States, 5 Cir. 1974, 503 F.2d 959; Chunn v. Clark, 5 Cir. 1971, 451 F.2d 1005.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

571 F.2d 1344, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-pedro-muniz-ca5-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack