United States v. Gustavo Garcia A/K/A "Popeye"

727 F.2d 1028, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24424
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedMarch 19, 1984
Docket83-5395
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 727 F.2d 1028 (United States v. Gustavo Garcia A/K/A "Popeye") is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Gustavo Garcia A/K/A "Popeye", 727 F.2d 1028, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24424 (11th Cir. 1984).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Gustavo Garcia was convicted in a jury trial of receiving ammunition after having been convicted of a felony. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(h)(1) (1976). To the underlying felony charge of grand theft in Florida, Garcia had pleaded nolo contendere, adjudication was withheld, and he was given probation, which he successfully served. Section 948.01, Fla.Stat. The district court, after a hearing in camera, held that this plea was voluntary for the purpose of admitting evidence of that Florida proceeding to prove the necessary prior felony conviction. Nothing is presented to us indicating that that finding was clearly erroneous.

Garcia’s contention that a state procedure for withholding adjudication of a criminal charge will not support a conviction under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(h)(1) (1976) of receiving ammunition after having been convicted of a felony is foreclosed by Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc., -- U.S. --, 103 S.Ct. 986, 74 L.Ed.2d 845 (1983). There is no problem of Dickerson being applied retroactively to Garcia. The prevailing law in the former Fifth Circuit prior to Dickerson was that state statutes that withheld finality do not prevent conviction within the meaning of Sec. 922. U.S. v. Lehmann, 613 F.2d 130 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Padia, 584 F.2d 85 (5th Cir.1978).

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. Armando Lazaro Fernandez
234 F.3d 1345 (Eleventh Circuit, 2000)
United States v. Willis
106 F.3d 966 (Eleventh Circuit, 1997)
United States v. Lewis Aaron Rockman
993 F.2d 811 (Eleventh Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Thompson
756 F. Supp. 1492 (N.D. Florida, 1991)
United States v. Eddie L. Jones
910 F.2d 760 (Eleventh Circuit, 1990)
Burkett v. State
518 So. 2d 1363 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
United States v. Victor Cabrera
786 F.2d 1097 (Eleventh Circuit, 1986)
United States v. Emilio Bruscantini
761 F.2d 640 (Eleventh Circuit, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
727 F.2d 1028, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gustavo-garcia-aka-popeye-ca11-1984.