United States v. Victor Battista, Ralph C. Hobbs, George Laris, Gaetano Alexander Miceli, Joseph R. Morris, George Laris

Third Circuit

United States v. Victor Battista, Ralph C. Hobbs, George Laris, Gaetano Alexander Miceli, Joseph R. Morris, George Laris

418 F.2d 572

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided December 3, 1969·No. 17836·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The appellant Laris first appealed from an order of the court below denying him a new trial. This court inadvertently endeavored to adjudicate the issues presented by Laris, United States v. Battista et al., Laris, Appellant, 3 Cir., 397 F.2d 286 (1968). The Supreme Court denied certiorari, Laris v. United States, 393 U.S. 936, 89 S,Ct. 297, 1 L.Ed.2d 272 (1968), it appearing that the order of the court below was not a final appealable order, no judgment of conviction, sentence and commitment having been entered in accordance with Rule 32(b), Fed.R.Crim.Proc., 18 U.S.C. Our former judgment therefore was void for we were without jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. Thereafter a valid judgment was entered in accordance with the cited rule and Laris has appealed.

We have examined the five grounds asserted by Laris and find them to be without merit. We also have scrutinized carefully the entire record in this case and we can find no error. Accordingly the judgment 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 Laris first appealed from an order of the court below denying him a new trial. This court inadvertently endeavored to adjudicate the issues presented by Laris, United States v. Battista et al., Laris, Appellant, 3 Cir., 397 F.2d 286 (1968). The Supreme Court denied certiorari, Laris v. United States, 393 U.S. 936, 89 S,Ct. 297, 1 L.Ed.2d 272 (1968), it appearing that the order of the court below was not a final appealable order, no judgment of conviction, sentence and commitment having been entered in accordance with Rule 32(b), Fed.R.Crim.Proc., 18 U.S.C. Our former judgment therefore was void for we were without jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. Thereafter a valid judgment was entered in accordance with the cited rule and Laris has appealed.

We have examined the five grounds asserted by Laris and find them to be without merit. We also have scrutinized carefully the entire record in this case and we can find no error. Accordingly the judgment will be affirmed.

United States v. Victor Battista, Ralph C. Hobbs, George Laris, Gaetano Alexander Miceli, Joseph R. Morris, George Laris, 418 F.2d 572 (3d Cir. 1969).

Pincite

418 F.2d 572 (United States v. Victor Battista, Ralph C. Hobbs, George Laris, Gaetano Alexander Miceli, Joseph R. Morris, George Laris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related