Court Opinion

ID: 2963760
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:14:51.034121+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:32.673337
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          November 29, 1995     [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                             
                                 ____________________

        No. 95-1172 

                               PETER N. GEORGACARAKOS,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Stahl and Lynch,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Peter N. Georgacarakos on brief pro se.
            ______________________
            Jay P. McCloskey,  United States Attorney,  and Michael M. DuBose,
            ________________                                _________________
        Assistant  United   States   Attorney,  on   Memorandum  for   Summary
        Disposition, for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                      Per  Curiam.    Appellant  Peter  N.  Georgacarakos
                      ___________

            appeals from  the  denial  of  his  motion  for  relief  from

            judgment filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).

                      "[T]he  treatment  of   a  Rule  60(b)   motion  is

            committed  to the discretion of the district court and may be

            reversed only upon a finding of an abuse of that discretion."

            Ojeda-Toro v. Rivera-Mendez, 853 F.2d 25, 28 (1st Cir. 1988).
            __________    _____________

            We do not review the merits of the underlying judgment.  Id.
                                                                     ___

                      Because  appellant  claims   that  the   government

            engaged  in  fraud  in  opposing  his motion  to  vacate  his

            sentence,  see  28 U.S.C.    2255,  we  treat the  motion for
                       ___

            relief  from  judgment  as   having  been  filed  under  Rule

            60(b)(3).   This Rule allows such relief  for "fraud (whether

            heretofore     denominated    intrinsic     or    extrinsic),

            misrepresentation, or other misconduct of  an adverse party."

            To prevail under  Rule 60(b)(3), appellant must show that the

            alleged  fraud   prevented  him  from   "fully  and   fairly"

            presenting his claims  in support of the    2255 motion.  See
                                                                      ___

            In re M/V Peacock, 809 F.2d 1403, 1404-05 (9th Cir. 1987).
            _________________

                      Fraud can only have this effect when a party had no

            knowledge of  the alleged misrepresentations at  the time the
                                                         ________________

            supposed fraud took  place.  Ojeda-Toro, 853 F.2d at  29.  In
            __________________________   __________

            support of his  claim that the government  committed fraud by

            submitting  the  affidavit   of  appellant's  trial  counsel,

            appellant refers to the transcript of his trial.  "Even where

            misrepresentations are made during a litigation, it is not an

            abuse  of discretion to deny relief to the losing party under

            Rule  60(b)(3),  where  the  party  had  access  to  accurate

            information."    7  J.  Moore  &  J.  Lucas,  Moore's Federal
                                                          _______________

            Practice   60.24[5],  at 90 (2d ed.  Supp. 1994-95) (footnote
            ________

            omitted).    Because  appellant   had  access  to  the  trial

            transcript during the  course of the    2255 proceedings,  he

            was not prevented from  fully presenting his case.  See In re
                                                                ___ _____

            M/V Peacock, 809 F.2d at 1405.
            ___________

                      We therefore  affirm the judgment  of the  district
                                    ______

            court.  See 1st Cir. R. 27.1.
                    ___

                                         -3-