UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
MILTON CHARLES SMITH, AKA "CREEP," AKA "SHAW," AKA "SHORT," APPELLANT

D.C. Cir. | 1983-03-25
No. 81-2210
703 F.2d 627 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 12 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 the district court erred in imposing sentences on both a greater and lesser included offense and in setting a minimum sentence that violated statutory limits.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of multiple drug offenses and sentenced. After his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal, he filed a motion to vacate, argu…

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:

Opinion for the court PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal arises from the conviction of Milton Charles Smith in the United States District Court for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, 21 U.S.C. § 848 (1976); conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1976); possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1976); and traveling in interstate commerce with intent to distribute a controlled substance, 18 U.S.C. § 1952 (1976). The District Court sentenced Smith to a cumulative term of imprisonment of not less than 15 years and not more than 30 years. On direct appeal this court affirmed his conviction. United States v. Gantt, 617 F. 2d 831 (D.C.Cir.1980).

Subsequently, appellant filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1976) to vacate his conviction and sentence. He contended, among other things, that his conviction and sentence on separate counts for violating both 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 21 U.S.C. § 848 violated his constitutional rights under the Double Jeopardy Clause. The District Court denied his motion. This appeal followed.

The government concedes that the sentence imposed upon appellant is defective. It acknowledges that the District Court erroneously imposed sentences on both the greater offense (21 U.S.C. § 848) and the lesser included offense (21 U.S.C. § 846). The government also acknowledges that the District Court’s imposition of a 15-to 30-year sentence violates 18 U.S.C. § 4205(b)(1) (1976), which requires that a minimum sentence not exceed one-third of the maximum imposed.

Under these circumstances, we remand this case to the District Court for correction of its sentencing, i.e., by vacating the conviction and sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 846 and reducing the 15-year minimum to a minimum of ten years’ imprisonment.

So ordered.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw