Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Dennis T. McDonald

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided June 21, 1973No. 71-1085Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBazelon, Chief Judge

I agree that McDonald’s conviction must be affirmed. I also agree that the trial judge’s statements at the sentencing hearing were problematic. But I cannot agree that the sentence was nonetheless properly imposed.

The majority begins by asserting that the Young Adult Offender statute does not require that the sentencing judge state his reasons when he denies an eligible offender such a sentence.1 I cannot agree. Nor do I think that United States v. Waters,2 where the sole statute *519at issue was the Youth Corrections Act, can be taken as having settled the question in its dicta.

But, more to the…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Shapiro v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  5. Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

34 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