Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States v. Lance Schenker, A/K/A Lance Shenker

486 F.2d 318

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1973-11-06
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: Lance Schenker appeals solely on the ground that he was improperly sentenced under the Youth Corrections Act, 18 U.S.C., § 5010 et seq. He complains that he was sentenced as an adult in the absence of an express finding by the trial court that he would not derive benefit from treatment, 18 U.S.C., § 5010(d). The government argues that such a finding is implicit in the sentence. This is a dispute which can quickly be resolved by the District Court. We vacate the sentence and remand to the District Court, where the appellant may be resentenced on his plea of guilty, according to law, and with appropriate findings under 18 U.S.C., § 5010(d).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Lance Schenker, A/K/A Lance Shenker. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
6 opinions
UNITED STATES v. SCHENKER,486 F.2d 318(5th Cir. 1973)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. LANCE SCHENKER, A/K/A LANCE
SHENKER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
No. 73-2601.
Summary Calendar.fn*
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
November 6, 1973.
Page 319
Daniel S. Pearson, Bruce S. Rogow, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellant.

J. Daniel Ennis, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Before GEWIN, COLEMAN and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[1] Lance Schenker appeals solely on the ground that he was improperly sentenced under the Youth Corrections Act,18 U.S.C. § 5010et seq. He complains that he was sentenced as an adult in the absence of an express finding by the trial court that he would not derive benefit from treatment,18 U.S.C. § 5010(d). The government argues that such a finding is implicit in the sentence.

[2] This is a dispute which can quickly be resolved by the District Court.

[3] We vacate the sentence and remand to the District Court, where the appellant may be resentenced on his plea of guilty, according to law, and with appropriate findings under18 U.S.C. § 5010(d).

[4] Vacated and remanded.Page 490
  1. Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970,431 F.2d 409, Part I. ↩