UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
WILLIAM RAY DORAN, APPELLANT; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE, V. DONALD ARTHUR PADGETT, APPELLANT

8th Cir. | 1980-04-28
Nos. 79-1991, 79-1992
619 F.2d 783 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1980) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 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 it has no authority to review the severity of sentences imposed by the district court absent a gross abuse of discretion.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellants pleaded guilty to four counts of armed bank robbery and were sentenced to four consecutive 25-year terms. Both defendants appealed the seve…

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.

PER CURIAM.

The appellants in this case seek review of the sentences imposed on them in the district court1 proceedings. William Ray Do-ran and Donald Arthur Padgett entered guilty pleas to four separate counts of armed bank robbery2 in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. A presentence investigation was conducted and the resulting report was distributed to counsel in advance of the sentencing. On November 19,1979, the appellants appeared separately before the district court and were each sentenced to four consecutive 25 year terms. Both defendants appeal the severity of their sentences.

Two issues are raised on appeal. The first is whether this court has the authority to review the sentences of the district court under the narrow standard set forth in Woosley v. United States, 478 F. 2d 139 (8th Cir. 1973). Assuming that such authority exists, the second issue is whether the 100 year sentences constitute gross abuse of the trial court’s discretion and require this court to reduce the sentences on appeal. Even assuming, arguendo, that this court has the authority to reduce the district court’s sentence, it is clear that the 100 year sentences are not the product of a gross abuse of the district court’s discretion. Therefore, the sentences imposed on the appellants must stand.

Accordingly, we order that the sentences imposed by the district court be, and hereby are, affirmed.

. The Honorable Albert G. Schatz, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

. Cases from five federal judicial districts were transferred to Nebraska pursuant to Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. An indictment against Doran for a robbery in Kansas City, Missouri, was dismissed at the time of sentencing. The remaining four counts, to which each of the defendants entered a guilty plea, arose out of armed robberies in Des Moines, Iowa; Salt Lake City, Utah; Sacramento, California; and Seattle, Washington.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw