United States v. Peter Pesano
This text of 304 F.2d 856 (United States v. Peter Pesano) 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.
Opinion
304 F.2d 856
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Peter PESANO, Appellant.
No. 366.
Docket 27513.
United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.
Submitted June 7, 1962.
Decided July 9, 1962.
Robert M. Morgenthau, U. S. Atty., Southern Dist. of New York (Thomas Day Edwards, Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel), for appellee.
Peter Pesano, pro se.
Before CLARK, WATERMAN and MOORE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was convicted in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York after a jury trial and was sentenced to serve four concurrent terms of two years each. Upon appeal the conviction was affirmed, United States v. Pesano, 293 F.2d 229 (2 Cir., 1961). Appellant moved in the district court for a correction of the two year sentence, alleging that the judge who presided at the trial and who sentenced him one week later had indicated after verdict at the conclusion of the trial that the sentence to be later imposed would be four concurrent terms of eighteen months each. The motion was denied and appellant appeals. The sentence, imposed one week after verdict and after allocution, was a permissible sentence. The motion brought pursuant to Rule 35, Fed.R.Crim.Proc., 18 U.S.C. and 28 U.S. C. § 2255 was properly denied below, and that denial is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
304 F.2d 856, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 4530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-peter-pesano-ca2-1962.