United States v. Honorable Albert Lee Stephens, Jr.

Good Law
449 F.2d 103·1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7840
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 29, 197171-1884_1California1,347 words

Opinion

Opinion

Merrill, J.

On November 2, 1970, certain defendants were convicted of narcotics offenses involving marijuana committed in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 176a. On May 24, 1971, sentence was imposed by respondent judge. He sentenced the defendants to five years, the minimum prescribed by § 176a. He then, however, suspended the sentences and placed each defendant on probation for a period of five years. This action, theretofore unauthorized, was permitted by the terms of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, P.L. 91-513, 84 Stat. 1236 , the effective date of which was May 1,1971.

The sole question presented here is whether the intervention of the effective date of the new Act prior to the time of sentencing made probation available as to offenses committed prior to the new Act’s effective date. Contending that it did not, the Government seeks mandamus to compel the sentencing judge to vacate his order suspending sentence and placing the defendants on probation.

21 U.S.C. § 176a made it an offense to receive, conceal, buy, sell or facilitate the transportation, concealment or sale of marijuana unlawfully imported into the United States. The penalty prescribed was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.