Court Opinion

ID: 9474219
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:50:54.55698+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:57.757700
License: Public Domain

WIDENER, Circuit Judge,
concurring
and dissenting:
I concur in all of the opinion of the majority except part IV thereof, and to that part I respectfully dissent. I would affirm.
I think the findings of fact of the district court were not clearly erroneous and should be upheld. 18 U.S.C. § 3576.
I also think that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding Scarborough to be a dangerous special offender. 18 U.S.C. § 3576.
The only difference of any consequence in the conclusion drawn by the district court and in the conclusion drawn by the majority is that the majority concludes that Scarborough’s participation in the drug rehabilitation program was sufficient to counterbalance his other activities and the other evidence of his criminal proclivity, while the district court concluded to the contrary.
While I acknowledge that the district court would have been justified in finding that Scarborough was not a dangerous special offender on that account, I think its finding that Scarborough was such an offender was also within its discretion and based upon findings of fact by that court which were not clearly erroneous.