SIDNEY A. MAUNEY, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

6th Cir. | 1972-01-26
No. 71-1589
454 F.2d 273 United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (1972) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that a defendant can be sentenced under the statute providing the more severe penalty when two statutes proscribe identical conduct.


Facts & Procedural History

Mauney was convicted of interstate transportation of a firearm after a felony conviction and sentenced to three years. He filed a petition to vacate s…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

[*274] PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order dismissing Mauney’s petition to vacate sentence. We affirm.

In 1970 Mauney was convicted in the United States District Court for interstate transportation of a firearm after having been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. He was sentenced to a three year term of imprisonment. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. (No. 20,705, 6th Cir., March 25, 1971, unpublished.)

In June 1971 Mauney filed the instant action, asserting that his sentence exceeded the statutory maximum.

Mauney asserts that he should have been sentenced under 18 U.S.C. App. § 1202(a).1 The Government contends that he was indicted, tried, and convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)2 and was properly sentenced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a),3

The record shows that Mauney was tried and convicted for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The sentence was within the maximum provided by 18 U. S.C. § 924(a). Where two statutes proscribe identical conduct, the Government may elect to prosecute under the statute providing the more severe penalty. See Berra v. United States, 351 U.S. 131, 134-135, 76 S.Ct. 685, 100 L.Ed. 1013 (1956).

Affirmed.

. “§ 1202. Receipt, possession, or transportation of firearms — Persons liable; penalties for violations

“(a) Any person who— (1) has been convicted by a court of the United States or of a State or any political subdivision thereof of a felony, . . . and who receives, possesses, or transports in commerce or affecting commerce, after the date of enactment of this Act, any firearm, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both.”

. “ § 922. Unlawful acts

* * * * *

“(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—

(1) who is under indictment for, or who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; to ship or transport any firearm or ammunition in interstate or foreign commerce.”

. “ § 924. Penalties

“(a) Whoever violates any provision of this chapter . . . shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, and shall become eligible for parole as the Board of Parole shall determine.”


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw