From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sutton v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 22, 1959
266 F.2d 529 (5th Cir. 1959)

Opinion

No. 17628.

May 22, 1959.

John E. Sutton, in pro. per.

Dan Kennerly, Asst. U.S. Atty., William B. Butler, U.S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for appellee.

Before RIVES, CAMERON and JONES, Circuit Judges.


The appellant unsuccessfully sought to have the district court set aside, under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, the sentence imposed after he was convicted on two counts of an indictment charging violation of the acts relating to marihuana. One of the counts on which he was convicted charged participation in a conspiracy and the other alleged the commission of a substantive offense.

It is claimed by the appellant that the imposition of consecutive sentences on substantive and conspiracy counts is double punishment in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The law is otherwise. Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 74 S.Ct. 358, 98 L.Ed. 435.

The claim is also made that the sentence of ten years on the conviction on the substantive charge "consecutive with" the sentence on the conspiracy charge is ambiguous and that the language used indicates that concurrent sentences were or may have been intended. Reliance is placed on Bledsoe v. Johnston, D.C.N.D.Cal. 1944, 58 F. Supp. 129. This case does not sustain the appellant's contention. See United States v. Daugherty, 269 U.S. 360, 46 S.Ct. 156, 70 L.Ed. 309.

A correct judgment was entered. It is

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Sutton v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 22, 1959
266 F.2d 529 (5th Cir. 1959)
Case details for

Sutton v. United States

Case Details

Full title:John E. SUTTON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 22, 1959

Citations

266 F.2d 529 (5th Cir. 1959)

Citing Cases

United States v. Frontero

The sentence imposed by the district court was within statutory limits. See Rogers v. United States, supra;…

Rakes v. United States

The distinguished district judge's language is clear and definite and technically correct." See also Sutton…