United States v. Kenneth W. Gentile
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Kenneth W. GENTILE, Appellant
Opinion
ORDER Appellant Kenneth W. Gentile appeals an order of the district court revoking his probation. Appellant argues that the district *542 court abused its discretion in revoking probation because it relied upon a state criminal conviction which is being appealed and therefore has not yet become final. We reject this contention.
Federal courts have consistently ruled that a criminal conviction provides sufficient grounds for revocation of probation even though an appeal from the conviction is still pending.
See Roberson v. State of Connecticut, 501 F.2d 305, 308 (2d Cir. 1974), and cases cited therein. A certified copy of the conviction is sufficient proof of the violation.
United States v. Lustig, 555 F.2d 751, 753 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1045 , 98 S.Ct. 889 , 54 L.Ed.2d 796 (1978).
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(“Federal courts have consistently ruled that a criminal conviction provides sufficient grounds for revocation of probation even though an appeal from the conviction is still pending.”)
Cited by 15 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.