Notice: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jacob Leonard Watts, Defendant-Appellant., 833 F.2d 310 (4th Cir. 1987)

Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (October 27, 1987)

Docket number: 87-7594
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/37179176
Id. vLex: VLEX-37179176

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

Jacob Leonard Watts, appellant pro se.

Kenneth Davis Bell, Office of United States Attorney, for appellee.

Before JAMES DICKSON PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jacob Leonard Watts pleaded guilty to Count Three of a three-count indictment. For attempting to evade or defeat income tax in violation of 26 U.S.C. Sec . 7201, Watts was sentenced to imprisonment of five years, and a $10,000 fine was imposed. In response to Watts' Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 motion, the sentence was reduced to four years, with the proviso that he remain committed until payment of the $10,000 fine. Watts moved to correct his reduced sentence, challenging the legality of the requirement that he remain committed until payment of the fine. The district court denied the motion to correct, and Watts appeals.

The statute sets as a maximum penalty a $10,000 fine or five years' imprisonment, or both. 26 U.S.C. Sec . 7201. Additionally, 18 U.S.C. Sec . 3565(a)(1) permits the imposition of "committed fines," meaning that an inmate may not be paroled until he pays the fine. Federal regulations remedy the potentially illegal, discriminatory effect of that statute by providing that an inmate who otherwise would be paroled may not be held beyond his release date if he establishes indigency. See 28 C.F.R. Secs. 2.7, 571.50-571.56 (1986); Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971).

Under these circumstances, we cannot agree with Watts that the revised sentence illegally increased his punishment. The district court did not err in denying the motion to correct, and we affirm the judgment.

As the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument.

AFFIRMED.

Other documents:
strother v. hill aircraft & leasing corporation., 142 ga. app. 206, 235 s.e.2d 647 (1977) | frederick w. lowey, and fred l. engle d/b/a resource service company, et al., appellants v. james g. watt, secretary, uni... | edwin cordeiro and edmund lewis (individually and doing business as cordeiro and lewis appliances), appellants, v. american home assurance company (a cor... | Resolución de 3 de julio de 2008, de la Secretaría General Técnica, por la que se adjudican puestos de trabajo por el sistema de lib... | consulta no vinculante of subdireccion general de impuestos sobre el consumo n 1584-98, of o... | departamento de obras publicas, transportes y comunicaciones - resolución de expedientes sancionadores | Case of Audiencia Provincial - Zaragoza - Sección 4ª nº 475/2007, of September 17, 2007 | Case of Tribunal Supremo - Sala Cuarta, de lo Social, of February 26, 2008 | Case of Tribunal Superior de Justicia - Oviedo, Asturias - Sala de lo Social, of July 03, 1998 | Lista completa de los nombres que integrarán los órganos constitucionales | Resolucion de 21 de marzo de 2003, de la Secretaria General del Consejo de Universidades, por la que se anuncia la fecha en que se celebraran los sorteos para designa...