ALEXANDER

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• United States v. Narcisa Savinovich, 845 F.2d 834 (9th Cir. 1988)
  …d.2d 620 (1966). For that reason, we are limited to an inquiry into whether the legislative classification under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(l)(B)(ii) is irrational or unreasonable. See United States v. Alexander, 673 F. 2d 287, 288 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 876, 103 S.Ct. 168, 74 L.Ed.2d 139 (1982). See also United States v. Holmes, 838 F. 2d 1175, 1178 (11th Cir.1988) (we determine only whether Congress’ judgment was rational). Subtitle A of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 prescribes minimum sentences of…
• United States v. James A. Whitley (83-5428), 734 F.2d 1129 (6th Cir. 1984)
  …Congress recognized that “controlled substances have a substantial and detrimental effect on the health and general welfare, and elected to classify cocaine as a narcotic — ”. United States v. Alexander, 673 F. 2d 287, 288 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 876, 103 S.Ct. 168, 74 L.Ed.2d 139 (1982). We find that in light of the goals of the Act, and the widespread abuse of cocaine, this legislative classification is neither irrational nor unreasonable. This classification is proper for the stated Congressi…
• United States v. Schrock, 855 F.2d 327 (6th Cir. 1988)
  …ee United States v. Hope, 714 F. 2d 1084 (11th Cir.1983); United States v. Fogarty, 692 F. 2d 542 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040, 103 S.Ct. 1434, 75 L.Ed.2d 792 (1983); United States v. Alexander, 673 F. 2d 287 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 876, 103 S.Ct. 168, 74 L.Ed.2d 139 (1982). . We also reject Schrock’s suggestion that the mention of a “hearing" in section 811(a) mandates that the district court hold a hearing to decide which schedule controls. As the language of section 811 clearly…