History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Jack Nunn
527 F.2d 1390
5th Cir.
1976
Check Treatment

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jack NUNN, Defendant-Appellant

No. 75-1544

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

March 5, 1976

Gerald H. Goldstein, Ernest J. Altgelt, III, San Antonio, Tex., for defendant-appellant.

John Clark, U. S. Atty., W. Ray Jahn, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(5 Cir., 1976, 525 F.2d 958).

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, RIVES and GEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.

RIVES, Circuit Judge (specially concurring):

While I concur in the denial of rehearing, I do suggest that the case of

Poteet v. Fauver, 517 F.2d 393 (3d Cir. 1975),1 does not sustain the point for which it is cited.
Poteet
has little, if any, relevance to the question of whether a sentencing judge may consider his own belief that the defendant perjured himself at the trial in appraising the character of the defendant and in determining the length of his sentence, which is one of the questions here involved. The question involved in
Poteet
was the propriety vel non of the sentencing judge‘s increasing the length of the sentence because of the failure or refusal of the defendant to admit his guilt at the time of sentencing or allocution. The Third Circuit in
Poteet
relied strongly upon
Thomas v. United States, 368 F.2d 941 (5th Cir. 1966)
.2 The fact that Judge Gee has recently written for this Court relying upon
Thomas
and holding it improper for the judge at sentencing to put pressure on defendants to confess,3 shows that the majority does not mean to set a course which would depart from
Thomas
. Indeed, an examination of Shepard‘s Citations reveals several other cases both from the Fifth Circuit and from other Circuits which have approved the holding of
Thomas
. I agree with the opinion and decision of the Third Circuit in
Poteet
. I specially concur to express my view that
Thomas
and
Poteet
are clearly distinguishable from the case at bar.

Notes

1
1. See footnote 4 to the majority opinion on original hearing.
2
2. See 517 F.2d at 396.
3
3. See
United States v. Rodriguez, 498 F.2d 302, 312, 313 (5th Cir. 1974)
.

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Jack Nunn
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date Published: Mar 5, 1976
Citation: 527 F.2d 1390
Docket Number: 75--1544
Court Abbreviation: 5th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.