skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 42648 Find in a Library
Title: DUE PROCESS AT SENTENCING - IMPLEMENTING THE RULE OF UNITED STATES V. TUCKER
Journal: UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW  Volume:125  Issue:5  Dated:(MAY 1977)  Pages:1111-1133
Author(s): ANON
Corporate Author: University of Pennsylvania
Law School
United States of America
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 23
Sponsoring Agency: University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19174
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: IN THIS 1972 CASE, THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT A SENTENCE IS CONSTITUTIONALLY INVALID IF ITS LENGTH WAS ENHANCED BY THE SENTENCING COURT'S CONSIDERATION OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS LATER FOUND UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNDER GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT.
Abstract: GIDEON (1963) HELD THAT A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT HAS A RIGHT TO THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL AT TRIAL AND THAT THE STATES MUST PROVIDE COUNSEL FOR INDIGENTS UPON REQUEST. IN ATTEMPTING TO IMPLEMENT THIS RULE, THE COURTS OF APPEALS HAVE NOT AGREED ON THE PROPER PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS FOR A TUCKER CHALLENGE TO A SENTENCE. THIS COMMENT DISCUSSES POSSIBLE APPROACHES TO THE THREE MOST TROUBLESOME ISSUES POSED BY TUCKER: 1) THE PROPER PROCEDURE FOR INVALIDATING A PRIOR CONVICTION UNDER GIDEON; 2) THE PROPER STANDARD FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A SENTENCING JUDGE SUFFICIENTLY RELIED UPON PRIOR INVALID CONVICTIONS SO AS TO REQUIRE VACATING THE SENTENCE; 3) THE PROPER REMEDY FOR A TUCKER VIOLATION, ONCE ESTABLISHED. ALTHOUGH THE TUCKER PROBLEM CAN THEORETICALLY ARISE IN VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS, THIS COMMENT DISCUSSES THE PROBLEM ONLY IN THE MOST RECURRENT CONTEXT-WHERE A FEDERAL SENTENCE IS ENHANCED BY CONSIDERATION OF INVALID PRIOR STATE CONVICTIONS, AND THE FEDERAL PRISONER CHALLENGES HIS SENTENCE IN THE FEDERAL COURT THAT SENTENCED HIM UNDER 28 UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 2255 (REQUESTING THE SENTENCING DISTRICT COURT TO VACATE THE JUDGMENT AND SET ASIDE THE SENTENCE). (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)...ELW
Index Term(s): Conviction records; Federal courts; Judicial decisions; Judicial discretion; Post-conviction remedies; Right to Due Process; Sentencing/Sanctions; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=42648

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.