Amato v. United States
| Decision Date | 10 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 16247.,16247. |
| Citation | 374 F.2d 36 |
| Parties | Vincent AMATO, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Vincent Amato, pro se.
George J. Koelzer, Asst. U. S. Atty., David M. Satz, Jr., U. S. Atty., Newark, N. J., for appellee.
Before HASTIE, GANEY and SEITZ, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from the refusal of a sentencing court, long after conviction and commitment, to reduce a sentence by the number of days of the appellant's incarceration while awaiting trial.
The sentence in question was substantially less than the maximum provided by Congress. The judge who denied the present request for relief is the judge who imposed the sentence originally. This sentence was imposed long before the effective date of the provision of the Bail Reform Act of 1966 concerning credit for presentence incarceration.
The judgment will be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gilbert v. United States
...Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 929, 89 S.Ct. 264, 21 L.Ed.2d 266 (1968); Bryans v. Blackwell, supra 387 F.2d at 766; Amato v. United States, 374 F.2d 36 (3d Cir. 1967); Malone v. United States, 269 F. Supp. 755, 756 (N.D.Fla.1967). It is clear from a review of these cases that the 1966 amend......
-
Mid-South Towing Co. v. Har-Win, Inc.
... ... OKC CORPORATION LIQUIDATING TRUST, Defendant-Appellant ... No. 82-3680 ... United States Court of Appeals, ... Fifth Circuit ... June 4, 1984 ... Charles L. Stern, ... ...
-
Kukla v. National Distillers Products Company
... ... PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION CO., Third-Party Defendant ... No. 72-2152 ... United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit ... Argued April 19, 1973 ... Decided August 2, ... ...
-
Holt v. United States, 17602.
...concurrent five year sentence under the first count, which was considerably below the maximum provided for the offense. Amato v. United States, 374 F.2d 36 (3 Cir. 1967). This circumstance makes the petitioner\'s point on this appeal purely academic and of no real Petitioner's argument that......