DAVIS

v.

O'LEARY, WARDEN, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Vontsteen, 950 F.2d 1086 (5th Cir. 1992)
  …2d at 50. We hold that Vontsteen was required to make a contemporaneous objection to his sentence on grounds of vindictiveness to preserve his claim of Pearce error for appeal. United States v. Forester, 874 F. 2d 983, 984 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 920, 110 S.Ct. 284, 107 L.Ed.2d 264 (1989). B. Vontsteen argues alternatively that he satisfied any contemporaneous objection requirement. Rule 51 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure governs the form contemporaneous objections must take to pres…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370 (10th Cir. 1992)
  …should be adequately brought to the sentencing judge's attention so that the judge is given a fair opportunity to state on the record the pertinent reasons for the resentence." United States v. Forester, 874 F. 2d 983, 984 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 920, 110 S.Ct. 284, 107 L.Ed.2d 264 (1989). The appellants did not alert the sentencing judge to their vindictiveness claims. Accordingly, appellate review is limited to correcting plain errors that affect substantial rights and threaten a miscarriage o…