United States v. Michael A. Cannizzaro

Good Law
871 F.2d 809·1989 WL 25053·1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 3499
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 198987-3165California1,606 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

Michael A. Cannizzaro appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. Fed.R. Crim.P. 35(a). Following a plea of guilty, Cannizzaro was sentenced to two concurrent five-year terms for armed robbery and assault in the commission thereof, 18 U.S. C. § 2113(a), (d) (1982 & Supp. IV 1986), and a mandatory five-year consecutive term for use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, id. at § 924(c) (Supp. IV 1986), for his role in the April 25, 1986, armed robbery of the First National Bank of Anchorage. He argues that the court erred in imposing consecutive sentences for armed robbery and assault and for use of a firearm in the commission of a felony; that the court failed to make factual findings before ordering restitution under section 5 of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, 18 U.S.C. § 3664 (Supp. IV 1986); and that imposition of restitution violated the terms of Cannizzaro’s plea agreement. We review the legality of a criminal sentence de novo. United States v. Pomazi, 851 F.2d 244, 246 (9th Cir.1988).

I

Cannizzaro argues that imposition of consecutive sentences for violations of sections 2113 and 924 violates…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.