Gowdy v. United States, 13717.
| Decision Date | 15 October 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 13717.,13717. |
| Citation | 207 F.2d 730 |
| Parties | GOWDY v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Perry B. Woodall, J. Hugh Aaron, Toppenish, Wash., for appellant.
Harvey Erickson, U. S. Atty., Frank Freeman, Asst. U. S. Atty., Spokane, Wash., for appellee.
Before ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges, and JAMES M. CARTER, District Judge.
An indictment was originally returned charging the appellant with a violation of § 242 of Title 18 U.S.C.A. in that appellant and other named defendants deprived one Andrew Juarez of the rights, privileges and immunities secured to him and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The offense charged was a misdemeanor. The appellant was not an officer of the State but was a federal officer. Subsequently there was filed in the same case an information which purported to supersede the indictment. The information charged that Andrew Juarez was deprived of the rights, privileges and immunities secured to him and protected by the Constitution of the United States. It was contended that the grand jury indictment could not thus be superseded and that prosecution could not proceed without a resubmission to the grand jury. It is said that the failure thus to proceed in this case deprived the court of jurisdiction.
Since the offense of which appellant was convicted was a misdemeanor for which he could be prosecuted on an information, Rule 7, Rules Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., and since the information charged a different offense than that stated in the indictment, appellant's contention upon this point is without merit for the reasons stated by this court in United States v. Pickard, 9 Cir., 207 F.2d 472.
The appellant also urges that the court erred in admitting certain evidence and that the instructions to the jury were in certain respects improper and erroneous. With respect to those claimed errors, we note that although some of the appellant's codefendants who were acquitted upon the trial interposed objections to the evidence here referred to, the record fails to disclose that this appellant made any objections whatever; furthermore, that prior to the time when any defendant interposed an objection, the same matters had already been testified to without objection. We note also that with respect to claimed errors relating to the admission of evidence and the giving of instructions, there has been a complete disregard of this court's Rule 18(d) which provides...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Otherson
...(although whether the statute applied to acts under color of federal laws was not an issue raised by the defendant). Gowdy v. United States, 207 F.2d 730 (9th Cir. 1953). The counterarguments that appellants raise carry little weight. First, they claim that section 242 was enacted to enforc......
-
U.S. v. Brewer, 80-1448
...681 F.2d 973 ... UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, ... Robert S. BREWER, II, ... See also Gowdy v. United States, 207 F.2d 730, ... 731 (9th Cir. 1953); United States ... ...
-
Carter Oil Co. v. McCasland, 4665.
...207 F.2d 728 (1953) ... CARTER OIL CO ... McCASLAND et al ... United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit ... October 27, 1953 ... Rehearing ... ...