United States v. Philip Michael Memoli
This text of 449 F.2d 160 (United States v. Philip Michael Memoli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant appeals from a conviction and sentence for interstate transportation of a stolen car, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2312. We affirm.
The appellant claims that misstatements by the prosecutor during opening and closing arguments deprived him of a fair trial. No objection was made to the statements. No instruction was requested and none given that arguments of counsel are not evidence. Not all misstatements require a reversal of a conviction. Mares v. United States (10 Cir. 1968) 409 F.2d 1083, 1085. And, in the absence of an objection plain error must appear. Leonard v. United States (9 Cir. 1960) 277 F.2d 834, 841.
We have examined the record and the claimed prejudice is clearly not plain error, but assuming an objection was made, the claims of prejudice are clearly insubstantial. See generally, Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 89 S.Ct. 1420, 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969).
Likewise, the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, notwithstanding appellate counsel’s description of trial counsel’s efforts, is clearly without *161 merit. Appellant did not object to his representation below. Our review of the record does not disclose representation so inadequate that the trial court’s failure to notice it was plain error. United States v. Sullivan (9 Cir. 1970) 435 F.2d 650, 652.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
449 F.2d 160, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-philip-michael-memoli-ca9-1971.