From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Reynolds

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Apr 2, 1990
897 F.2d 1091 (11th Cir. 1990)

Summary

In United States v. Reynolds, 897 F.2d 1091, 1091-92 (11th Cir. 1990), we explained that § 235(a)(1), 98 Stat. 1837, 2031 contains a savings provision which suspends the effective date of the § 224(a) amendments until November 1, 1986.

Summary of this case from U.S. v. McGuire

Opinion

No. 89-7409. Non-Argument Calendar.

April 2, 1990.

George Franklin Reynolds, Jr., Mobile, Ala., pro se.

Gloria A. Bedwell, Asst. U.S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.

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

Before KRAVITCH, ANDERSON and CLARK, Circuit Judges.


Appellant brought a Rule 35(a) motion attacking the legality of the special parole term imposed by the district court for appellant's violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a). Reynolds had plead guilty to Count Two of an indictment which charged him with possession with intent to distribute approximately two (2) ounces of cocaine. The violation was alleged to have occurred on or about June 9, 1986. He was sentenced pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) to six years imprisonment and to three years special parole.

Appellant's suit involves the intricacies and vagaries of the various amendments to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) which Congress enacted in anticipation of their adopting the new Sentencing Guidelines. One of the significant features of the Sentencing Guidelines is that the parole system has been abolished. United States v. Scroggins, 880 F.2d 1204, 1208 (11th Cir. 1989). The principal amendments involved in this case are the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Pub.L. No. 98-473, §§ 224(a), 235(a)(1), 501-503, 98 Stat. 1837, 2030-31, 2068-69 (1984), and the Sentencing Reform Amendments Act of 1985, Pub.L. No. 99-217, § 4, 99 Stat. 1728 (1985). Appellant claims that § 224(a), 98 Stat. 1837, 2030 deleted those portions of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A), 841(b)(1)(B) that pertain to the imposition of a special parole term as part of the sentence. While this claim is correct in part, what appellant fails to notice is that § 235(a)(1), 98 Stat. 1837, 2031 contains a saving provision which provides that the § 224(a) amendments were not to become effective until November 1, 1986. Section 4, 99 Stat. 1728 amended the effective date to November 1, 1987. Therefore, the special parole provision was in fact part of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) in effect on June 9, 1986, the date of Reynolds' offense. Courts in other circuits have addressed this issue and reached a similar result. See, e.g., United States v. McDaniel, 844 F.2d 535, 536-37 (8th Cir. 1988).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Reynolds

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Apr 2, 1990
897 F.2d 1091 (11th Cir. 1990)

In United States v. Reynolds, 897 F.2d 1091, 1091-92 (11th Cir. 1990), we explained that § 235(a)(1), 98 Stat. 1837, 2031 contains a savings provision which suspends the effective date of the § 224(a) amendments until November 1, 1986.

Summary of this case from U.S. v. McGuire
Case details for

U.S. v. Reynolds

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. GEORGE FRANKLIN REYNOLDS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: Apr 2, 1990

Citations

897 F.2d 1091 (11th Cir. 1990)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. McGuire

Appellant's second claim is that the district court erred in imposing a term of special parole since the…

U.S. v. Hessen

While the 1986 amendment generally became effective on the date of its enactment, the concept of "supervised…