Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jerry Henry Green v. United States, 71-1916_1 (1971)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 71-1916_1 Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 20, 1971
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 447 F.2d 987 Jerry Henry GREEN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 71-1916. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Aug. 27, 1971, Rehearing Denied Oct. 20, 1971. Jerry H. Green, in pro. per. Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Chief, Crim. Div., John Newman, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before CARTER, KILKENNY and CHOY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: 1 Appellant was convicted on five counts of an indictment charging violations of 21 U.
More

447 F.2d 987

Jerry Henry GREEN, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 71-1916.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 27, 1971, Rehearing Denied Oct. 20, 1971.

Jerry H. Green, in pro. per.

Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Chief, Crim. Div., John Newman, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before CARTER, KILKENNY and CHOY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant was convicted on five counts of an indictment charging violations of 21 U.S.C. 174 (sale of narcotics and conspiracy). His convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. Green v. United States, 282 F.2d 388 (9th Cir. 1960). Here, he appeals from a denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2255 application, 324 F. Supp. 321. We affirm.

2

The sole issue presented is whether there was an impermissible variance between the sentence as announced from the Bench, and the judgment of commitment and sentence entered on the same day.

3

Although the court's oral pronouncement seems to be somewhat ambiguous, when read as a whole it does reflect the court's intention to impose a total sentence of twenty years. There is no ambiguity whatsoever about the written judgment of commitment and sentence. That the sentence in writing should be referred to in order to resolve ambiguities in the oral pronouncement is well settled. Baca v. United States, 383 F.2d 154, 157 (10th Cir. 1967); Chapman v. United States, 289 F.2d 539, 544 (5th Cir. 1961); Payne v. Madigan, 274 F.2d 702 (9th Cir. 1960). Viewed in the light of the preciseness of the written sentence, the ambiguity, if any, in the oral pronouncement completely disappears. The same thing can be said of the alleged variance.

4

Affirmed.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer