United States v. Usher

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Usher

500 F.2d 388, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6953

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 9, 1974

DocketNo. 73-4022

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 500 F.2d 388 (United States v. Usher) 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

United States v. Usher, 500 F.2d 388, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6953 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to this court’s remand under United States v. Dover, 489 F.2d 688 (5th Cir. 1974), the district judge who sentenced the defendant has supplemented the record in this cause with the statement “At the time I pronounced sentence in this case I determined and I now determine that the Defendant would not derive benefit from treatment under 18 U.S.C. § 5010(b) (The Youth Correction Act).” This statement complies with the district court’s duty under that act. Dorszynski v. United States, -U.S.-, 94 S.Ct. 3042, 41 L.Ed.2d -(1974).

Since Usher has never raised with the district court any question as to the propriety of his waiver of the right to be represented by counsel in that forum, we refuse to consider his contention to that effect on this appeal.

The judgment and commitment entered March 14, 1973 and the subsequent actions of the district court in this cause are

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to this court’s remand under United States v. Dover, 489 F.2d 688 (5th Cir. 1974), the district judge who sentenced the defendant has supplemented the record in this cause with the statement “At the time I pronounced sentence in this case I determined and I now determine that the Defendant would not derive benefit from treatment under 18 U.S.C. § 5010(b) (The Youth Correction Act).” This statement complies with the district court’s duty under that act. Dorszynski v. United States, -U.S.-, 94 S.Ct. 3042, 41 L.Ed.2d -(1974).

Since Usher has never raised with the district court any question as to the propriety of his waiver of the right to be represented by counsel in that forum, we refuse to consider his contention to that effect on this appeal.

The judgment and commitment entered March 14, 1973 and the subsequent actions of the district court in this cause are

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

500 F.2d 388, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 6953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-usher-ca5-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack