Pearsall v. States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Appellant seeks reversal of the trial court’s denial of his motion for correction of sentence pursuant to Rule 351 in connection with his conviction for distribution of heroin.2 On appeal, he contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request to be sentenced under the addict exception 3 and that his prior conviction for conspiracy to distribute heroin could not be used to enhance his sentence. Finding no error, we affirm.
I
The evidence at trial demonstrated that appellant sold a package of heroin to an undercover officer for $25.00, violating D.C.Code § 33-541(a)(l).…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Davis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Tuten v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- In Re McBrideDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Tuten v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Brandon v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gilmore v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Pansing v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995