Del Piano v. United States
| Citation | 362 F.2d 931 |
| Decision Date | 17 May 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 15432.,15432. |
| Parties | Frank R. DEL PIANO, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit) |
Frank Del Piano, pro se.
Drew J. T. O'Keefe, U. S. Atty., Joseph P. Briag, Asst. U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Before STALEY, SMITH and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges.
This matter came before the court below on the appellant's motion under § 2255 of Title 28 U.S.C.A., to vacate and set aside his conviction and sentence. The court concluded that the "MOTION, ANSWER AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS along with the records and files of this case conclusively show that the appellant is not entitled to relief," and denied the motion without hearing. It is urged on this appeal that the denial of a hearing was error.
The appellant, represented by court appointed counsel, was convicted on his plea of guilty to an indictment charging him with the armed robbery of a bank, in violation of § 2113(a), (d) of Title 18 U.S.C.A., and conspiracy to commit the said offense, in violation of § 371 of the same title. He was sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of twenty-five years to run consecutively with a term of imprisonment he was then serving in a state penitentiary.
The motion, supported by the appellant's affidavit, alleges that the plea of guilty was induced by a promise, made by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that upon such a plea the appellant would be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of ten years to run concurrently with the sentence he was then serving. The answer of the United States Attorney, supported by the counter-affidavits of the agents, denies this allegation. This answer put in issue the factual allegation made in the motion.
The court below found as a fact "that no promises were made to the appellant by the Federal Bureau of Investigation." It clearly appears from the court's opinion that this finding was not predicated on the "motion and the files and records of the case" but solely on the counter-affidavits of the agents and the report of an interview with the appellant while he was incarcerated. We have examined the record of the criminal proceeding, including the transcript of the arraignment and sentence, and we find nothing therein on which the critical issue of fact could have been properly decided. We are of the opinion that under these circumstances the denial of a hearing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Hoffa
...9, 1964); Romero v. United States, 327 F. 2d 711, 712 (CA 5, 1964); Evans v. Eyman, 363 F.2d 540, 542 (CA 9, 1966); Del Piano v. United States, 362 F.2d 931, 933 (CA 3, 1966). While these cases do not involve motions for new trial on newly discovered evidence, they expose the law's current ......
-
U.S. v. Janoe
...1051, 95 S.Ct. 629, 42 L.Ed.2d 647 (1974). In Del Piano v. United States, 240 F.Supp. 687 (E.D.Pa.1965), rev'd on other grounds, 362 F.2d 931 (3d Cir.1966), the district court was faced with precisely this issue; "the words 'Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation' were substituted [......
-
Moore v. United States
...proceedings (28 U.S.C. § 2255; Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 494, 82 S.Ct. 510, 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962); Del Piano v. United States, 362 F.2d 931 (3 Cir. 1966)) and since what occurred in the district court, even though at the time unrecorded, remains a fact in the proceedings, we......
-
State v. Robbins
...1963); Romero v. United States, 327 F.2d 711 (5th Cir. 1964); Scott v. United States, 349 F.2d 641 (6th Cir. 1965); Del Piano v. United States, 362 F.2d 931 (3rd Cir. 1966); Evans v. Eyman, 363 F.2d 540 (9th Cir. 1966). In the present case defendant has consistently urged in his briefs and ......