The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. It summarizes that:
Eugene James Allegrucci was convicted on two counts of possessing goods stolen from interstate commerce. He appealed his conviction, which was considered and the decisions were adverse to his contentions with one exception. The sentence was vacated and remanded because Allegrucci had not been given the opportunity to speak on his own behalf before sentencing. On this second appeal following resentencing, the court affirms the judgment below, as the law of the case had already been established in the earlier opinion.
The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. It summarizes that:
Eugene James Allegrucci was convicted on two counts of possessing goods stolen from interstate commerce. He appealed his conviction, which was considered and the decisions were adverse to his contentions with one exception. The sentence was vacated and remanded because Allegrucci had not been given the opportunity to speak on his own behalf before sentencing. On this second appeal following resentencing, the court affirms the judgment below, as the law of the case had already been established in the earlier opinion.
The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. It summarizes that:
Eugene James Allegrucci was convicted on two counts of possessing goods stolen from interstate commerce. He appealed his conviction, which was considered and the decisions were adverse to his contentions with one exception. The sentence was vacated and remanded because Allegrucci had not been given the opportunity to speak on his own behalf before sentencing. On this second appeal following resentencing, the court affirms the judgment below, as the law of the case had already been established in the earlier opinion.
Argued October 29, 1962. Decided November 20, 1962. Rehearing Denied February 4, 1963.
Michael vonMoschzisker, Philadelphia, Pa. (Stanford Shmukler,
Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant. Bernard J. Brown, U. S. Atty., Scranton, Pa. (Daniel R. Minnick, Asst. U. S. Atty., Scranton, Pa., on the brief), for appellee. Before STALEY, HASTIE and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
This is the second appeal from a judgment of conviction on two counts of an
indictment which charged the appellant with violations of Section 659 of Title 18 U.S.C., to wit, the possession of goods stolen from interstate commerce, knowing the same to have been stolen. When the case was before this Court on the earlier appeal the questions here raised were considered and decided and the decisions thereon, with one exception, were adverse to the contentions of the appellant. United States v. Allegrucci, 3 Cir., 299 F.2d 811. However, the sentence was vacated and the case was remanded because the appellant had not been afforded the opportunity to speak on his own behalf in mitigation of punishment. Ibid. The present appeal followed the resentence of the appellant. The law of the case having been established in the earlier opinion of the Court, the questions raised are no longer open for review.
Louis E. Wolfson and Elkin B. Gerbert v. Honorable Edmund L. Palmieri, United States District Judge For The Southern District of New York, 396 F.2d 121, 2d Cir. (1968)
United States of America Ex Rel. Carl E. Deflumer, Jr. v. Vincent Mancusi, As Warden of Attica State Prison, Attica, New York, 380 F.2d 1018, 2d Cir. (1967)
United States of America Ex Rel. Domingo Colon, Relator-Appellant v. Hon. Harold W. Follette (Successor to Hon. Edward M. Fay), Warden, Green Haven Prison, Stormville, New York, 366 F.2d 775, 2d Cir. (1966)
United States v. Harry Greenberg, Dominic Mattia, Nick Pannarella, Ernest Paul, Alfred Sireci, and Hirschel Weisbord, AKA Hirschel Washbord, Alfred Sireci, 419 F.2d 808, 3rd Cir. (1969)