United States v. Gregory Paul Noonan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that Garland’s language was clearly dictum and holding that “a pardon does not vitiate guilt”
• finding that Garland’s language was clearly dictum and holding that “a pardon does not vitiate guilt”
• concluding that a pardon can only remove the punishment for a crime, not the fact of the crime itself, and holding that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Burdick implicitly rejected its prior sweeping conception of the pardoning power in Garland
• characterizing Garland 's \blots out\ statement as dictum rejected by Burdick
• despite Presidential pardon, court refused to expunge record of conviction of Military Selective Service Act violation where “no challenge to the conviction itself is made”
• though an “extreme” remedy, “a federal court has the inherent power to expunge an arrest and conviction record.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).