Chee v. United States

Citation449 F.2d 747
Decision Date01 December 1971
Docket NumberNo. 71-1539.,71-1539.
PartiesSam Becenti CHEE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)

Sam Becenti Chee, in pro. per.

Richard K. Burke, U. S. Atty., Morton Sitver, Asst. U. S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for appellee.

Before KOELSCH, CARTER and CHOY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Chee, a Navajo Indian, appeals from the dismissal without a hearing of his motion for vacation of sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Petitioner asserted three grounds for relief: (1) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because an interpreter, used at trial to translate Petitioner's testimony from Navajo to English, was a "servant" of the government; (2) that the indictment was "duplicitous;" and (3) that Indians were systematically excluded from the grand and petit jury rolls.

First: The District Court correctly rejected Petitioner's claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Petitioner does not allege any specific instances of prejudice resulting from the interpreter's alleged relationship with the government, and the record reveals none. The trial court has broad discretion in determining the fitness and qualifications of interpreters, and "exercise of that discretion will not be disturbed on review in the absence of some evidence from which prejudice can be inferred." Lujan v. United States, 209 F.2d 190, 192 (10th Cir. 1953).

Second: The District Court correctly held that the indictment charging Petitioner was not duplicitous. The record shows that each count of the two count indictment charged but one offense. Further, objections to the form of an indictment are waived by failure to timely object F.R.Crim.P., Rule 12(b) and, in addition, Chee was convicted only on one count.

Third: The District Court rejected Petitioner's challenge to the racial makeup of the grand and petit jury rolls on two grounds: (1) failure to object at trial, and (2) failure to allege facts tending to show discrimination. This was error.

A claim of systematic exclusion will be entertained for the first time in a section 2255 proceeding unless it affirmatively appears from the record that the petitioner has knowingly waived his constitutional right to object. Fernandez v. Meier, 408 F.2d 974, 977 (9th Cir. 1969). This record reveals no such waiver.

Additionally, Petitioner's allegations, although not nicely worded, were sufficient to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Davis v. United States 8212 6481
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 17, 1973
    ...(2). Because its decision is contrary to decisions of the Ninth Circuit in Fernandez v. Meier, 408 F.2d 974 (1969), and Chee v. United States, 449 F.2d 747 (1971), we granted certiorari to resolve the conflict. Petitioner contends that because his § 2255 motion alleged deprivation of a fund......
  • Weems v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • May 14, 1973
    ...U.S. 863, 92 S.Ct. 106, 30 L.Ed.2d 107 (1971), rehearing denied, 404 U.S. 961, 92 S.Ct. 308, 30 L.Ed.2d 280 (1971) and Chee v. United States, 449 F.2d 747 (9th Cir. 1971) wherein failure to assert a right at the appropriate time during the course of the trial as required by the federal crim......
  • N.L.R.B. v. Bakers of Paris, Inc., 89-70050
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • April 8, 1991
    ...United States v. Lozano, 511 F.2d 1, 6 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 850, 96 S.Ct. 94, 46 L.Ed.2d 74 (1975); Chee v. United States, 449 F.2d 747, 748 (9th Cir.1971).14 We note that it is a question left to the Board's discretion whether to promulgate a rule by way of administrative rul......
  • Commonwealth v. Lee
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • November 12, 2019
    ...1989) (judge in direct contact with defendant is given wide discretion to decide adequacy of interpreter); Chee v. United States, 449 F.2d 747, 748 (9th Cir. 1971) (per curiam) (trial judge has broad discretion in determining fitness and qualifications of interpreters).8 The defendant conce......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT