Cardova Lawary v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Per curiam
On appeal from denial of his motion to vacate sentence, 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Lawary raises two issues. First he alleges that his sentence was improper because the court, at sentencing, failed to make an explicit finding that he would not benefit from sentencing under the Youth Corrections Act, 18 U.S.C. § 5010. Such a finding is mandated by Dorszynski v. United States, 418 U.S. 424, 94 S.Ct. 3042, 41 L.Ed.2d 855 (1974). The court made such a finding ex post facto in dismissing the § 2255 motion, but La-wary argues that this is insufficient. Since Dorszynski was decided four months after Lawary…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Blackledge v. AllisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- McCarthy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Williams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- United States ex rel. Welch v. LaneCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Richard Johnson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- United States v. Anthony C. KovicCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Gary v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- Charles Curtis Harris v. Irl Day, Warden United States Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1981
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.