United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Michael Dankert, Defendant-Appellant. No. 74-3282. Summary Calendar. [Fn*], 507 F.2d 190 (5th Cir. 1975)

Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (January 22, 1975)

Docket number: 74-3282

Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/larry-michael-dankert-summary-calendar-38386780
Id. vLex: VLEX-38386780

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

Document language

Request manual translation

Search in this document

Document options

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Charles Burman, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Joseph Lewis Walker, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Julia Walker, Appellant., 584 F.2d 1354 (4th Cir. 1978)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Fernando Medina Cantu, Petitioner-Appellant, v. United States of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 79-1080. Summary Calendar. [Fn*], 598 F.2d 471 (5th Cir. 1979)

U.S. Supreme Court - Bifulco v. United States, 447 U.S. 381 (1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Scott Jacobson, Defendant-Appellant., 578 F.2d 863 (10th Cir. 1978)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ellen Lou Foundas, Defendant-Appellant., 610 F.2d 298 (5th Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Albert Irvin Cates, Petitioner-Appellant, v. United States of America, Respondent-Appellee., 626 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. - Alphonse Bifulco, Petitioner-Appellant, v. United States of America, Respondent-Appellee., 600 F.2d 407 (2nd Cir. 1979)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - United States of America, Appellant, v. Andrew Kirkpatrick Mearns, Iii, Peter John Thomas, John William Hedley, Appellees., 599 F.2d 1296 (3rd Cir. 1979)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Donald Bienvenue, Appellant., 632 F.2d 910 (1st Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Preston Sellers, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Johnnie Caradine, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Donald Allen, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. William E. Jewett, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Dennis Lavern English, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. William James Monroe, Appellant., 603 F.2d 53 (8th Cir. 1979)

See all citations to this document

Text:

J. V. Eskenazi, Federal Public Defender (Court-appointed), Michael L. Brodsky, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellant.

Robert W. Rust, U.S. Atty., Donald L. Ferguson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Before BELL, SIMPSON and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a part of the sentence imposed as a result of a plea of guilty to a charge of conspiring, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 963, to import cocaine, a Schedule II narcotic controlled substance, into the United States, a violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 952(a). The complaint is to that part of the sentence imposing a special parole term of three years following release from incarceration.

It is conceded that a special parole term following incarceration is mandatory under 21 U.S.C.A. § 960(b)(1), upon conviction of a substantive violation of § 952(a)(1). The argument is that the conspiracy statute, § 963, does not include the special parole term provision of § 960(b)(1). We disagree. § 963 provides:

Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this subchapter is punishable by imprisonment or fine or both which may not exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.

The punishment provision of § 963 must be considered in light of §§ 952(a) and 960, since it is these statutes which define the offense which was the object of the conspiracy, and provide for punishment therefor. They provide:

§ 952(a) It shall be unlawful to import into the customs territory of the United States from any place outside thereof (but within the United States), or to import into the United States from any place outside thereof, any controlled substance in schedule I or II of subchapter I of this chapter

* * * * * *

§ 960(a)(1)

Any person who -

contrary to section 952, 953, or 957 of this title, knowingly or intentionally imports or exports a controlled substance,

* * * * * *

shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.

§ 960(b)(1)

In the case of a violation under subsection (a) of this section with respect to a narcotic drug in schedule I or II, the person committing such violation shall be imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or fined not more than $25,000, or both. If a sentence under this paragraph provides for imprisonment, the sentence shall include a special parole term of not less than three years in addition to such term of imprisonment.

We have no trouble whatever in understanding the language of § 963 to permit punishment not exceeding that provided for an offense in violation of § 952(a). Appellant was charged with conspiring to commit such an offense and pleaded guilty thereto. The `substantive offense in question carried a special parole term of three years. Appellant received a special parole term of three years.

Affirmed.

[fn*] Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409.