UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
FRED LOUIS BELL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
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.
The court held that the district court must comply with the prior mandate and resentence the appellant to a term not exceeding six years.
Appellant was initially sentenced to six years, but after a new trial, received a ten-year sentence based on perceived perjury. This court reversed th…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandate Of Appellate Court cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Bell pled guilty in 1968 to five counts of bank robbery and was sentenced to serve a total of not more than six years. In May 1970, the district court granted Bell a new trial. Following conviction at this new trial, Bell was sentenced to ten years imprisonment on the same charges which originally resulted in a six-year sentence. The district court attempted to justify the increased sentence by attributing it to what the court considered “perjury” by appellant at the second trial. This court, in United States v. Bell, 5 Cir. 1972, 457 F. 2d 1231, reversed the imposition of this higher sentence and entered the following clear mandate:
In effect, Bell has been adjudicated guilty of the crime of perjury without a presentment to a grand jury, without a trial by a jury of his peers, without the right to present evidence in his behalf, and without other procedural safeguards designed for the protection of an accused. United States v. Gambert, 433 F. 2d 321 (4th Cir. 1970). In essence, summary punishment has been inflicted upon Bell without due process of law. We therefore vacate the judgment and sentence and remand the cause to the district court with directions to impose a new sentence not to exceed six years.
On remand the district court chose to disregard the clear and unequivocal mandate of this court and again sentenced appellant to ten years. We hereby order the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to comply with this court’s directions in United States v. Bell, supra, and to resentence this appellant forthwith to a term not to exceed six years.
Remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Harrison, 524 F.2d 421 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
-
United States v. Johnson, 713 F.2d 654 (11th Cir. 1983)
-
United States v. Flynn, 664 F.2d 1296 (5th Cir. 1982)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. Bell, 457 F.2d 1231 (5th Cir. 1972)
- United States v. Gambert, 433 F.2d 321 (4th Cir. 1970)