Lsslie C. Bostick and Charles P. Lainhart v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Lsslie C. Bostick and Charles P. Lainhart v. United States

409 F.2d 5, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13137

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 24, 1969

Docket24287

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 409 F.2d 5 (Lsslie C. Bostick and Charles P. Lainhart v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lsslie C. Bostick and Charles P. Lainhart v. United States, 409 F.2d 5, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13137 (5th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING

Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge and WISDOM, Circuit Judge, and BREWSTER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The petition of the United States for a rehearing is denied.

A defendant who receives the maximum sentence on each of several counts, the sentences to run concurrently, must be considered as having received *6 the maximum sentence provided by law within the meaning of Bryans v. Blackwell, 5 Cir. 1967, 387 F.2d 764. See the recent decision of this Court in United States v. McCullough, 5 Cir. 1969, 405 F.2d 722. Accord: Lee v. United States, 9 Cir. 1968, 400 F.2d 185. In the case now before the Court, therefore, the good time credit should be computed at the rate of ten days a month because the maximum sentence of ten years was imposed upon the defendants.

To clarify our original opinion, we point out that there is no need to remand the case for a sentence allowing credit for time served prior to sentencing. “The computation of the service of a legally rendered sentence is an administrative responsibility.” Lee v. United States, 400 F.2d at 189. The law requires the Attorney General to give credit administratively to the defendants for the pre-sentence jail service.

The petition of Charles P. Lainhart for a rehearing is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING

Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge and WISDOM, Circuit Judge, and BREWSTER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The petition of the United States for a rehearing is denied.

A defendant who receives the maximum sentence on each of several counts, the sentences to run concurrently, must be considered as having received *6 the maximum sentence provided by law within the meaning of Bryans v. Blackwell, 5 Cir. 1967, 387 F.2d 764. See the recent decision of this Court in United States v. McCullough, 5 Cir. 1969, 405 F.2d 722. Accord: Lee v. United States, 9 Cir. 1968, 400 F.2d 185. In the case now before the Court, therefore, the good time credit should be computed at the rate of ten days a month because the maximum sentence of ten years was imposed upon the defendants.

To clarify our original opinion, we point out that there is no need to remand the case for a sentence allowing credit for time served prior to sentencing. “The computation of the service of a legally rendered sentence is an administrative responsibility.” Lee v. United States, 400 F.2d at 189. The law requires the Attorney General to give credit administratively to the defendants for the pre-sentence jail service.

The petition of Charles P. Lainhart for a rehearing is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

409 F.2d 5, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lsslie-c-bostick-and-charles-p-lainhart-v-united-states-ca5-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack