Legal Opinion
United States v. Richard Harmon Bell
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided March 9, 1993No. 92-1969PublishedCited by 247 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SELYA, Circuit Judge.
This appeal asks, essentially, a single question: Must a district court, at a reconvened sentencing hearing following a defendant’s successful appeal, reexamine its explicit findings and conclusions on an issue not raised in the appeal and which the defendant had previously acknowledged to be correctly decided? Because we do not believe that the district court is under so wide-ranging an obligation, we affirm the judgment below.
I
Prior Proceedings
Defendant-appellant Richard Harmon Bell pleaded guilty to an indictment detailing six prior felony convictions and charging him…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Hector Rivera-Martinez, A/K/A El MenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Piambino v. BaileyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Williamsburg Wax Museum, Inc. v. Historic Figures, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1987
- United States v. Anthony FioreCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by247 opinions
- United States v. Ernesto Quintieri, Carlo DonatoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- United States v. James F. MooredCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
- United States v. George Robert BellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
- Ellis v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Luiz Ben ZviCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
242 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.