UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
LINDA JEAN BOURDON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

9th Cir. | 1980-07-08
No. 79-1694
624 F.2d 77 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1980) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

[*78] PER CURIAM.

Appellant Bourdon pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to import marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C! § 963 (1976). Although appellant initially received a suspended sentence and was placed on probation, she violated the terms of the probation order and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment and, in addition, there was imposed a special parole term of two years. Appellant thereafter filed a Rule 35 motion to reduce the sentence. The term of imprisonment was reduced but the district court refused to strike the special parole term.

Appellant appeals on the ground that the special parole term is not authorized when the offense is conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963. The appellant is correct. In Bifulco v. United States, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 2247, 64 L.Ed.2d-(1980), the Supreme Court held that a court may not impose a special parole term for conspiracy to commit a drug offense under 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1976). Though appellant’s conviction was obtained under 21 U.S.C. § 963 (1976), the wording of that section is identical to that of section 846. Bifulco makes it clear, we think, that the special parole term given in this case was improper. We reverse and remand to the district court for resentencing in accordance with the authority of Bifulco.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw