Legal Opinion
William Herbert Jones v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided December 31, 1969No. 19745_1PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLACKMUN, Circuit Judge.
We are concerned here with the meaning of the words “mandatory penalty” as employed in a federal criminal statute. Do these words relate to a prison term of fixed or minimum length, as contrasted with the common “not more than * * * years”, or, on the other hand, do they relate to a prison term which must be served and as to which postconviction benefits of suspension of sentence, probation, and parole are specifically denied?
William Herbert Jones appeals pro se and in forma pauperis from the denial of his motion, allegedly based on 28 U.S. C. § 2255 and Rule 35,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. Philadelphia National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Andrews v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Anthony Joseph Munich v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Epifanio Trujillo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rodriguez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United States v. Martha L. WoodsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
- United States v. Zvonko Busic, Julienne Busic, Petar Matanic, Frane PesutCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- United States v. Trunnell Levett Price, and Arnold Lewis CoffeyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
- United States v. Terry Wayne Denson, Stephen Orlando and Joseph James Janish, Defendants- in Re United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.