Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 117 views

    United States v. George Sultani, 704 F.2d 132, 4th Cir. (1983)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where a defendant was found guilty of a traffic violation by a magistrate and sentenced to 5 days in jail, with the jail time suspended. On appeal, the defendant argued he had a right to counsel since jail time was imposed, even if suspended. However, the Court of Appeals found the appeal was now moot since the defendant had already served the full sentence and probation period. While not deciding the right to counsel issue, the Court said a jail sentence could not later be activated if the initial request for counsel was denied and the defendant was indigent. The Court advised magistrates in the circuit not to impose suspended jail

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. George Sultani, 704 F.2d 132, 4th Cir. (1983)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    117 views2 pages
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where a defendant was found guilty of a traffic violation by a magistrate and sentenced to 5 days in jail, with the jail time suspended. On appeal, the defendant argued he had a right to counsel since jail time was imposed, even if suspended. However, the Court of Appeals found the appeal was now moot since the defendant had already served the full sentence and probation period. While not deciding the right to counsel issue, the Court said a jail sentence could not later be activated if the initial request for counsel was denied and the defendant was indigent. The Court advised magistrates in the circuit not to impose suspended jail

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1983-03-31 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 704 F.2d 132 Docket: 82-5182

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where a defendant was found guilty of a traffic violation by a magistrate and sentenced to 5 days in jail, with the jail time suspended. On appeal, the defendant argued he had a right to counsel since jail time was imposed, even if suspended. However, the Court of Appeals found the appeal was now moot since the defendant had already served the full sentence and probation period. While not deciding the right to counsel issue, the Court said a jail sentence could not later be activated if the initial request for counsel was denied and the defendant was indigent. The Court advised magistrates in the circuit not to impose suspended jail

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    117 views2 pages

    United States v. George Sultani, 704 F.2d 132, 4th Cir. (1983)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where a defendant was found guilty of a traffic violation by a magistrate and sentenced to 5 days in jail, with the jail time suspended. On appeal, the defendant argued he had a right to counsel since jail time was imposed, even if suspended. However, the Court of Appeals found the appeal was now moot since the defendant had already served the full sentence and probation period. While not deciding the right to counsel issue, the Court said a jail sentence could not later be activated if the initial request for counsel was denied and the defendant was indigent. The Court advised magistrates in the circuit not to impose suspended jail

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    704 F.

    2d 132

    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,


    v.
    George SULTANI, Appellant.
    No. 82-5182.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Argued March 8, 1983.
    Decided March 31, 1983.

    Allen M. Lenchek, Upper Marlboro, Md., for appellant.


    William Otis, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., Alexandria, Va. (Elsie L. Munsell, U.S.
    Atty., Dennis E. Szybala, Asst. U.S. Atty., Alexandria, Va., Sanford
    Saunders, third year law student on brief), for appellee.
    Before WINTER, Chief Judge, ERVIN, Circuit Judge, and ALDRICH,*
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    In a trial by a magistrate, defendant was found guilty of violating a traffic


    regulation applicable to Washington National Airport. He was not represented
    by counsel. His request for the appointment of counsel, supported by his
    assertion of indigency, was denied on the ground that it was unlikely that a jail
    sentence would be imposed in the event that defendant was found guilty. Upon
    finding him guilty, the magistrate sentenced the defendant to five days in jail
    with execution of the jail term suspended and with defendant placed on
    unsupervised probation for twelve months on condition that he not violate any
    federal motor vehicle laws during the probation period. Defendant appealed to
    the district court, and from its judgment adverse to him, he appeals to us.

    Before us, defendant contends that he had a right to counsel because a jail
    sentence, the service of which was suspended, was imposed on him, that he did
    not waive his right to counsel, that the evidence was legally insufficient to
    support his conviction and that the charging documents failed to allege a

    violation of law on his part.


    3

    The sentence was imposed on January 6, 1982, and was fully served by the date
    on which this appeal was reached for argument. Defendant successfully
    completed the period of probation without further infraction of federal motor
    vehicle regulations, and so he is beyond the time that the jail sentence can be
    made active. We therefore dismiss his appeal as moot, because we perceive no
    subsequent collateral prejudice which defendant is suffering or will suffer and
    because he disclaims that the issue of his right to counsel is capable of
    repetition, yet evading review.

    While we expressly decline to decide if the right to counsel attaches when a


    suspended jail sentence is imposed, it is certainly clear that upon a violation of
    probation the jail sentence could not be made an active one when an indigent
    defendant had requested counsel and that claim was denied. It follows that the
    magistrates in this circuit should not impose even a suspended jail sentence in
    any case in which an unrepresented defendant has declined to waive his right to
    counsel.

    APPEAL DISMISSED.

    Honorable Bailey Aldrich, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the First
    Circuit, sitting by designation

    You might also like