Carpio Reyes v. United States
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
December 8, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________
No. 92-1831
PABLO CARPIO-REYES,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES,
Respondent.
__________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
___________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
___________________
Pablo Carpio-Reyes on brief pro se.
__________________
Daniel F. Lopez-Romo, United States Attorney, Edwin O.
______________________ ________
Vazquez, Assistant United States Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles-
_______ ________________
Espinosa on Motion for Summary Disposition and Memorandum of Law
________
in Support.
__________________
__________________
Per Curiam. In view of the Supreme Court's recent
__________
decision in United States v. Wilson, 112 S.Ct. 1351 (1992), which
_______________________
concluded that it is the Attorney General -- and not the court --
who decides whether time spent in detention will be credited
towards a sentence, the district court properly denied
appellant's motion for credit for time spent on bond.
Affirmed.
________
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carpio Reyes v. United States, (1st Cir. 1992).
Carpio Reyes v. United States (Carpio Reyes v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
United States v. Wilson
503 U.S. 329 (Supreme Court, 1992)