United States v. Cain
This text of 685 F.2d 326 (United States v. Cain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant pleaded guilty to bank robbery (18 U.S.C. § 2113(a)) and was thereafter the subject of a thorough psychiatric review prior to sentencing. The district judge offered him the option of a voluntary commitment to a state mental institution, but appellant flatly refused the offer. He was [327]*327then sentenced to ten years under 18 U.S.C. 4205, well within the twenty-year maximum for the offense in question. He argues that the sentence is disproportionate to the offense, given his background.
The sentence was well within statutory maximum limits and there are no reasons advanced by appellant that would justify our interference with the trial judge’s sentencing function. Dorszynski v. United States, 418 U.S. 424, 440-441, 94 S.Ct. 3042, 3051, 41 L.Ed.2d 855 (1974); United States v. DeWald, 669 F.2d 590 (9th Cir. 1982).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
685 F.2d 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cain-ca9-1982.