This appeal from the denial of appellant’s habeas petition presents a question of compliance with the requirement of
Dorszynski v. United States,
Appellant’s motion for reduction of sentence, Fed.R.Crim.P. 35, was denied in November 1974. He then brought a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, asserting once again that because Dorszynski was not complied with by the sentencing judge his sentence must be vacated.
In the circumstances of this case, we determine to follow the course suggested by the dissent in
Sappington v. U. S.,
“Once it is made clear that the sentencing judge has considered the option of treatment under the Act and rejected it, however, no appellate review is warranted.”418 U.S. at 443 ,94 S.Ct. at 3053 .
Here when the sentencing judge, also the judge reviewing the § 2255 petition, has clearly considered the option of F.Y.C.A. sentencing — indeed has done so not once but twice — we deem an affirmance to be within the spirit of Dorszynski and a remand an empty formality.
AFFIRMED.
