Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
2d 86
The United States seeks review of that portion of the district court's order
which reduced the period of defendant's disqualification in the food stamp
program from sixty days to thirty days after finding that defendant was in
violation of the regulations by selling ineligible, non-food items for food
stamps. See 7 C.F.R. 272.6, 273.1-273.9. We conclude that under Cross v.
United States, 512 F.2d 1212 (4 Cir. 1975), the record will not support the
reduction, and therefore we reverse this portion of the district court's order to
the end that the administratively imposed sanction shall remain undisturbed.
It is, of course, not questioned in this appeal that defendant was in violation of
the Food Stamp Act of 1964, 7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. and the regulations
thereunder. With that premise established, we said in Cross that the next step in
the process of judicial review that of review of the administrative sanction is
the limited determination of whether the sanction is "arbitrary and capricious,
In the instant case, the district court found that defendant had committed
numerous violations of the Act and the regulations, that on administrative
review the period of disqualification had been reduced from six months to sixty
days, and that, under the Secretary's criteria and definitions, the administrative
sanction could have been disqualification for a period between thirty and sixty
days. The district court then stated its conclusion "that the thirty-day
disqualification is a reasonable one, under all the circumstances" and it ordered
the reduction.
REVERSED.