U.S. v. Bechtel, 76-2701
| Decision Date | 16 February 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-2701,76-2701 |
| Citation | 547 F.2d 1379 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harry BECHTEL, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Joseph P. Covington, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee.
John F. Molloy, Robertson, Molloy, Fickett & Jones, Tucson, Ariz., for defendant-appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
Before DUNIWAY, CHOY and KENNEDY, Circuit Judges.
This court has been advised that the appellant died in Mesa, Arizona on December 20, 1976, while direct review of his criminal conviction was pending. Had Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481, 91 S.Ct. 858, 28 L.Ed.2d 200 (1971), been overruled in its entirety by Dove v. United States, 423 U.S. 325, 96 S.Ct. 579, 46 L.Ed.2d 531 (1976), the question whether the cause should be remanded to the district court as law and justice require might now be an open one. We do not understand Dove v. United States, however, as overturning the rule that "death pending direct review of a criminal conviction abates not only the appeal but also all proceedings had in the prosecution from its inception." Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. at 483, 91 S.Ct. at 860. We read Dove as controlling only the disposition of petitions for certiorari in the Supreme Court.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and the cause is remanded to the district court with directions to dismiss the indictment.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hoxsie
...United States v. Wilcox, 783 F.2d 44 (6thCir.1986); United States v. Littlefield, 594 F.2d 682 (8thCir.1979); United States v. Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379 (9thCir.1977); United States v. Davis, 953 F.2d 1482 (10thCir.1992); United States v. Logal, 106 F.3d 1547 (11thCir.1997).3 Ulmer v. State, 3......
-
Commonwealth v. Hernandez
...594 F.2d 682, 683 (8th Cir. 1979) ; United States v. Moehlenkamp, 557 F.2d 126, 128 (7th Cir. 1977) ; United States v. Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379, 1380 (9th Cir. 1977) (per curiam). Even in the circuit where the United States Court of Appeals has not addressed the issue in a published opinion, ......
-
U.S. v. Davis
...v. Mollica, 849 F.2d 723, 725-26 (2d Cir.1988); United States v. Littlefield, 594 F.2d 682, 683 (8th Cir.1979); United States v. Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379, 1380 (9th Cir.1977). Accordingly, as to Burke, we shall dismiss his appeal and remand the criminal judgment against him to the district co......
-
People v. Peters
...1988); United States v. Wilcox, 783 F.2d 44 (C.A.6, 1986); United States v. Littlefield, 594 F.2d 682 (C.A.8, 1979); United States v. Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379 (C.A.9, 1977).2 The majority misreads the Court of Appeals analysis of the compensatory component to the restitution order. The majori......
-
Innocence after death.
...625 F.2d at 685; United States v. Littlefield, 594 F.2d 682, 683 (8th Cir. 1979); Moehlenkamp, 557 F.2d at 128; United States v. Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379, 1380 (9th Cir. 1977) (per (174) United States v. Estate of Parsons, 367 F.3d 409, 415 (5th Cir. 2004). (175) 456 F. Supp. 2d 869 (S.D. Tex......