U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1968

Sandy Rogers v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided April 12, 1968 · Bazelon, McGowan, Robinson, Chambers

401 F.2d 387; 130 U.S. App. D.C. 322; 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7340 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. John J. Dwyer, Washington, D.C., was on the pleadings for appellant., Messrs. David G. Bress, U. S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker, Asst. U. S. Atty., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. Willie Bell, (Two Cases) (D.C. Cir. 1974)
David Proctor v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1969)
United States v. Margaret Mackin A/K/A Margaret Nelson, United States of America v. Erana Mae Gibson, A/K/A Erana Horton A/K/A Lorana Horton (D.C. Cir. 1974)
McDonald v. United States (D.C. 2006)
United States v. Betty Frankenthal (7th Cir. 1978)
State v. Washington (Iowa 1977)
Rhodes v. United States (D.C. 1976)
United States v. Thomas W. Bishton (D.C. Cir. 1972)
David E. Bosley v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1970)
Hunt v. Cox (District Court, E.D. Virginia 1970)
Rolland v. Michigan (District Court, E.D. Michigan 1970)
Frank Macklin Jr. v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1969)
Amos S. Tinker v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1969)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of appellant’s motion for summary reversal of the order of the District Court denying release on personal recognizance and of appellee’s opposition thereto, and it appearing that a judge of the District of Columbia Court of General Sessions sitting as a committing magistrate found that appellant was a fit subject for release and set bond in this rape case, but see 18 U.S.C. § 3141, at $10,000 notwithstanding the fact that it appeared that appellant was unable to furnish bond in said amount and that said judge refused to alter the terms of release on an application for review, but see Pelletier v. United States, 120 U.S. App.D.C. 40, 343 F.2d 322 (1965), and it further appearing that the District Court denied appellant’s motion for release. on personal recognizance, and it further appearing that the Supreme Court has recently held unconstitutional the death penalty provision of the Federal Kidnaping Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a), see United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 88 S.Ct. 1209, 20 L.Ed.2d 138 (April 8, 1968), it is

Ordered by the Court that this case is remanded to the District Court for consideration de novo, in the light particularly of United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 88 S.Ct. 1209, 20 L.Ed.2d 138 (April 8, 1968).

McGOWAN, Circuit Judge, did not participate in the foregoing order.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.