HINTON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Alley v. Dodge Hotel, 501 F.2d 880 (D.C. Cir. 1974)
  …t by the intended appellant or in his presence, though they appear in the transcript of the proceedings. B. g., United States v. Isabella, 251 F. 2d 223, 226 (2d Cir. 1958) ; United States v. Temple, 372 F. 2d 795, 799 (4th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 961, 87 S.Ct. 1024, 18 L.Ed.2d 110 (1967) ; Smith v. United States, 425 F. 2d 173, 174-175 (9th Cir. 1970). . Advisory Committee Note to Fed.R.App.P. 3. . Jordan v. United States Dist. Court, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 160, 162-163, 233 F. 2d 362, 364-365, vacat…
• Fiore v. United States, 696 F.2d 205 (2d Cir. 1982)
  …76). See also United States v. [*208] Alarik, 439 F. 2d 1349, 1351 (8th Cir.1971). The sentencing court may not, however, go beyond the plain language of section 3651, see United States v. Temple, 372 F. 2d 795, 799 (4th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 961, 87 S.Ct. 1024, 18 L.Ed.2d 110 (1967) (statute permitting punishment by fine or imprisonment does not permit fine and probation), nor may the court exceed the limitation that the conditions imposed must bear “ ‘a reasonable relationship to the treat…
• United States v. Alek Fidanian, 465 F.2d 755 (5th Cir. 1972)
  …Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258, 67 S.Ct. 677, 91 L.Ed. 884 (1947). The contempt power can be, however, limited by Congress and Section 401 has been found to so limit it. United States v. Temple, 349 F. 2d 116 (4th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 961, 87 S.Ct. 1024, 18 L.Ed.2d 110 (1967); Farese v. United States, 209 F. 2d 312 (1st Cir. 1954). But a limitation on a federal court’s inherent power to punish violations of its own orders must be explicit. Such an explicit limitation cannot be foun…