United States v. Philip Michael Memoli
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Philip Michael MEMOLI, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from a conviction and sentence for interstate transportation of a stolen car, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2312 . We affirm.
The appellant claims that misstatements by the prosecutor during opening and closing arguments deprived him of a fair trial. No objection was made to the statements. No instruction was requested and none given that arguments of counsel are not evidence. Not all misstatements require a reversal of a conviction. Mares v. United States (10 Cir. 1968) 409 F.2d 1083, 1085 . And, in the absence of an objection plain error must appear. Leonard v. United States (9 Cir. 1960) 277 F.2d 834, 841 .
We have examined the record and the claimed prejudice is clearly not plain error, but assuming an objection was made, the claims of prejudice are clearly insubstantial.
See generally, Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731 , 89 S.Ct. 1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969).
Likewise, the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, notwithstanding appellate counsel’s description of trial counsel’s efforts, is clearly without *161 merit. Appellant did not object to his representation below. Our review of the record does not disclose representation so inadequate that the trial court’s failure to notice it was plain error. United States v. Sullivan (9 Cir. 1970) 435 F.2d 650, 652 .
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.