UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
KENNETH WAYNE EIDUM, 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 trial judge's own estimation of the impact of prior convictions on sentencing is controlling, and if the judge states they were insignificant, the appellate court will not refute it.
Appellant pleaded guilty to interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle and was sentenced. He moved for modification of sentence, arguing prio…
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 Modification Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
CONTI, District Judge:
Kenneth W. Eidum pleaded guilty to violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2312 (Interstate Transportation of a Stolen Motor Vehicle). The trial judge sentenced him to three years. Eidum moved for modification of sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which motion was denied. He appeals to this court from that denial.
This court has held that when:
“There is a reasonable probability that the defective prior convictions may have led the trial court to impose a heavier sentence than it otherwise would have imposed . . . we are unable to conclude that the reception of such evidence was harmless beyond-a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Tucker, 431 F. 2d 1292, 1294 (9th Cir. 1970) affirmed 404 U.S. 443, 92 S.Ct. 589, 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1971). In the instant case, the trial judge, in his order denying appellant’s Motion for Modification of Sentence, stated:
“The three convictions to which defendant refers are a very insignificant part of a very long criminal record.”
This court will not refute the judge’s own estimation of the deleterious impact of the prior convictions on his determination of sentence. The record shows on its face that the judge did not consider those convictions in imposing-sentence. Therefore, we affirm.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Farrow v. United States, 580 F.2d 1339 (9th Cir. 1978)
-
Dukes v. United States, 492 F.2d 1187 (9th Cir. 1974)
-
Gil Munoz Leano v. United States, 494 F.2d 361 (9th Cir. 1974)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443 (U.S. 1972)
- Forrest S. Tucker v. United States, 431 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir. 1970)