United States v. Horace W. Boone, United States of Am. v. Earl Dickens, United States of Am. v. Durwood Ray Burgess, AKA Pete, United States of Am. v. Leonard Friedman, AKA 5757, & Horace W. Boone, AKA 102, 499 F.2d 551 (4th Cir. 1974). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Horace W. Boone, United States of Am. v. Earl Dickens, United States of Am. v. Durwood Ray Burgess, AKA Pete, United States of Am. v. Leonard Friedman, AKA 5757, & Horace W. Boone, AKA 102, 499 F.2d 551 (4th Cir. 1974). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Leonardo Soto, Jr., 718 F.2d 72 (3d Cir. 1983)
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 551 Imposing general sentence when counts may be reversed1 citing case
  • Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Leonardo Soto, Jr., 718 F.2d 72 (3d Cir. 1983).published
    In Corson , we reasoned that because of the possibility of reversal of one or more counts the convictions on all counts must be retained and the court should “impose a general sentence on all counts for a term not exceeding the maximum per…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Horace W. Boone, United States of America v. Earl Dickens, United States of America v. Durwood Ray Burgess, AKA Pete, United States of America v. Leonard Friedman, AKA 5757, and Horace W. Boone, AKA 102
73-1080.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jul 16, 1974.
Published opinion
499 F.2d 551
Published

499 F.2d 551

UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,
v.
Horace W. BOONE et al., Appellees.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,
v.
Earl DICKENS et al., Appellees.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant.
v.
Durwood Ray BURGESS, aka Pete, et al., Appellees.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,
v.
Leonard FRIEDMAN, aka 5757, and Horace W. Boone, aka 102, Appellees.

Nos. 73-1080 to 73-1083.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 1974.
Decided July 16, 1974.

Brian P. Gettings, U.S. Atty., David G. Lowe and Dennis H. Dohnal, Asst. U.S. Attys., on brief, for appellant.

Murray J. Janus, Edward D. Barnes, Matthew N. Ott, Jr., Richmond, Va., James W. Renney, Wakefield, Va., C. Hardaway Marks, Hopewell, Va., C. Willard Norwood, Richmond, Va., J. Claiborne Dance, Richard L. Jones, Petersburg, Va. (Court-appointed counsel), William Earle White, Jr., Andrew W. Wood, Richmond, Va. (Court-appointed counsel), James G. Harrison, Hopewell, Va. (Court-appointed counsel), Robert L. Harris, R. R. Ryder, Joseph S. Bambacus and R. Carter Scott, III, Richmond, Va., on brief, for appellees.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and WINTER and FIELD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[*~551–552]1

The issues presented by these appeals were specifically resolved adversely to the Defendants' position by the Supreme Court in United States v. Giordano et al., 416 U.S. 505, 94 S.Ct. 1820, 40 L.Ed.2d 341 (1974) and United States v. Chavez et al., 416 U.S. 562, 94 S.Ct. 1849, 40 L.Ed.2d 380 (1974). The orders of the district court 348 F.Supp. 168 granting the Defendants' motions to suppress are, therefore, reversed and the cases are remanded for further proceedings.

2

Reversed and remanded.