Court Opinion

ID: 9444827
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:13:12.660092+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:01.292208
License: Public Domain

CLARK, Chief Judge
(concurring).
The governing statute, 21 U.S.C. § 174 as amended, seems to me ambiguous and to afford some basis for an argument that the restriction on maximum sentences applies to convictions, rather than merely to offenses. If, as the judge here pointed out, he might have given a sentence up to 30 years, there is v dubious accomplishment of the expressed intent to make the penalties “more uniform” and to curtail the normal discretion of the sentencing judge. But I have been constrained to agree with my brothers, perhaps with somewhat more doubt, however, that there is not enough showing of such intent to vary the literal language of the statute and cause rejection of the usual rule. If the statute is to be again amended, as pending proposals suggest, the law-makers may well wish to clear up all ambiguity.