394 F.2d 511 - Lucio v. United States — 394 F.2d 511

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 2007

5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Gustavo Lucio, pro se.

¶2Ralph H. Harris, III, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., Ernest Morgan, U.S. Atty., for appellee.

¶3Before TUTTLE and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, Dis-rict Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5The appellant’s post-conviction motion to vacate his federal court sentence for violation of the narcotics laws is predicated upon the sole ground that a disparity between his sentence and that of a co-defendant amounted to a violation of his rights under the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution of the United States.

¶6The appellant was found guilty by a jury under two counts and received an eight year sentence on each count, to run concurrently. His co-defendant, an eighteen year old girl, pleaded guilty to one count and received a sentence under the Youth Corrections Act. She was subject to parole, 18 U.S.C. § 5010(b), while he was not, 26 U.S.C. § 7237(d).

¶7The trial court had the duty to consider the character, background and extent of participation of each defendant in the transaction, and to treat them as individuals in arriving at a decision as *512to just sentences. The appellant is in no position to make his co-defendant’s sentence a basis for complaint that his constitutional rights were violated.

¶8Affirmed.