Legal Opinion

McDonald v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 19, 1980No. 79-110PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant argues that his sentence should be vacated because it was based upon an incorrect interpretation of the statute allowing enhanced sentencing, D.C.Code 1973, § 22-104(a). We disagree for the reasons set forth in the trial court’s comprehensive opinion, which we adopt as our own and set forth below.

ORDER AND OPINION

This matter comes before the Court on the motion of defendant, Dennis T. McDonald, to vacate and correct sentence in which he claims that the sentence imposed by this Court was illegal because the increased penalty provisions of 22 D.C.Code 1973 § 104a were improperly…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Berman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Roberts v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Korematsu v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. Pettaway v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. Rouse v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Langley v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Pueblo v. Rodríguez MeléndezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 2000
  3. Shepard v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. Barnes v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department v. PorterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2025

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API