CLARK

v.

SOLEM, WARDEN, SOUTH DAKOTA STATE PENITENTIARY, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Resnick, 745 F.2d 1179 (8th Cir. 1984)
  …receiving more lenient sentences for the same statutory crime does not demonstrate any abuse of that discretion. See Clark v. So-lera, 693 F. 2d 59 (8th Cir.1982) (no denial of equal protection in disparate sentences of codefendants), cert, denied, 460 U.S. 1090, 103 S.Ct. 1787, 76 L.Ed.2d 355 (1983). Juno’s contention that the government failed to prove that he had previously been a drug dealer challenges the weight of the evidence, not its sufficiency, and is without merit. IY. In conclusion, we affirm…
• United States v. Rubin, 836 F.2d 1096 (8th Cir. 1988)
  …tencing co-participants in a criminal transaction does not provide a basis for resen-tencing. United States v. Becton, 817 F. 2d 468, 469 (8th Cir.1987); Resnick, 745 F. 2d at 1188; see also Clark v. Solem, 693 F. 2d 59 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1090, 103 S.Ct. 1787, 76 L.Ed.2d 355 (1983) (no denial of equal protection in disparate sentences of codefendants). For these reasons, we are convinced the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Rubin.12 We affirm Rubin’s conviction.…
• Campbell v. Fair, 838 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1988)
  …e conclusively shows that a vital mistake had been made.” Grace v. Butterworth, 586 F. 2d 878, 880 (1st Cir.1978). We review, of course, only for errors of constitutional magnitude. Subilosky v. Callahan, 689 F. 2d 7, 9 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1090, 103 S.Ct. 1788, 76 L.Ed.2d 356 (1983). “[T]he trial court, however, possesses a ‘wide degree of discretion’ and ... the remedy is to be ‘sparingly used’.” Grace, 586 F. 2d at 881 (quoting Sawyer v. Mullaney, 510 F. 2d 1220, 1221 (1st Cir.1975)). We…