Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Loveless, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Charles Loveless's appeal of his 18-month sentence for escape. The court dismissed the appeal, as the district court's decision not to depart downward from the sentencing guidelines in this case is not reviewable on appeal. Specifically, the district court refused Loveless's requests for departure based on avoiding greater harm or his extraordinary physical impairment from being HIV positive. As the district court has discretion over deciding whether to depart downward, the appeals court cannot review its decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-08-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-5682

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Charles Loveless's appeal of his 18-month sentence for escape. The court dismissed the appeal, as the district court's decision not to depart downward from the sentencing guidelines in this case is not reviewable on appeal. Specifically, the district court refused Loveless's requests for departure based on avoiding greater harm or his extraordinary physical impairment from being HIV positive. As the district court has discretion over deciding whether to depart downward, the appeals court cannot review its decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    9 views2 pages

    United States v. Loveless, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Charles Loveless's appeal of his 18-month sentence for escape. The court dismissed the appeal, as the district court's decision not to depart downward from the sentencing guidelines in this case is not reviewable on appeal. Specifically, the district court refused Loveless's requests for departure based on avoiding greater harm or his extraordinary physical impairment from being HIV positive. As the district court has discretion over deciding whether to depart downward, the appeals court cannot review its decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-5682

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLES ARTHUR LOVELESS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief
    District Judge. (CR-95-245-A)
    Submitted:

    July 25, 1996

    Decided:

    August 14, 1996

    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Roger G. Nord, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F. Fahey,
    United States Attorney, Michael E. O'Hare, Special Assistant United
    States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Charles Arthur Loveless seeks to appeal his 18-month sentence
    for escape, 18 U.S.C.A. 751(a) (West Supp. 1996). Loveless, who
    is HIV positive, contends that the district court erred in refusing
    him a departure below the guideline range under USSG 5K2.11,
    p.s.* (avoidance of greater harm), or USSG 5H1.4, p.s. (extraordinary physical impairment). The district court's decision not to
    depart is not reviewable on appeal. United States v. Bayerle, 898
    F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 819 (1990).
    We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral
    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (Nov.


    1994).
    2

    You might also like