Baber v. United States
Decision Date | 01 November 1966 |
Docket Number | No. 23558.,23558. |
Citation | 368 F.2d 463 |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Parties | Sanford R. BABER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
E. V. Boagni, Asst. U. S. Atty., Shreveport, La., for appellee.
Before RIVES, THORNBERRY and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.
This appeal is from the denial of a motion under Rule 35, Fed.R.Crim.P., for the correction of an allegedly illegal sentence. On August 30, 1961, the district court entered the following judgment of conviction and sentence:
On May 20, 1964 the appellant was conditionally released. On April 13, 1965 the probation officer recommended that the court order the probationer to show cause why his probation should not be revoked on the asserted ground that: "On April 3, 1965 probationer sexually molested his eight (8) year old daughter, Carolyn Baber." The order to show cause was issued and the warrant of arrest executed on the same day, April 13, 1965. On April 19, 1965 the district court entered the following order:
The appellant recognizes that the original sentence imposed of four years' imprisonment followed by five years' probation was a valid and legal sentence, but argues that the original sentence could not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Manley v. United States
...and he was then resentenced to ten years imprisonment following revocation of probation, are therefore inapposite. See Baber v. United States, 368 F.2d 463 (5th Cir. 1966); Smith v. United States, 297 F.Supp. 131 (W.D.Mo.1968). The argument that this provision amounts to double jeopardy has......
-
Anglin v. Johnston
...so providing, be credited on a previously imposed sentence. United States v. Hawkins, 492 F.2d 771 (5th Cir. 1974); Baber v. United States, 368 F.2d 463 (5th Cir. 1966); Thomas v. United States, 327 F.2d 795 (10th Cir. 1964); United States v. Guzzi, 275 F.2d 725 (3d Cir. 1960). The refusal ......
-
U.S. v. Evers, 75-3996
...which might have been imposed at the time of original sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3653 (see n. 3 supra ); see also Baber v. United States, 5 Cir., 1966, 368 F.2d 463, 465; Smith v. United States, 5 Cir., 1974, 505 F.2d 893, 894-896. There is, therefore, no merit to this AFFIRMED. 1 18 U.S.C. § ......
-
Martinez v. Day, CIV-77-1091-D.
...entitled to have time on probation credited on his sentence. United States v. Guzzi, 275 F.2d 725 (CA3 1960). See also Baber v. United States, 368 F.2d 463 (CA5 1966). A similar argument that a person on probation is not free but instead is subject to restrictions and control was rejected b......