U.S. v. Corbin Farm Service, 78-1286
| Decision Date | 12 July 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-1286,78-1286 |
| Citation | 578 F.2d 259 |
| Parties | , 8 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,615 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORBIN FARM SERVICE, Patrick William Feeney, Frank Harry Michaud, Jr., and John Richard Harris, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Richard W. Nichols, Chief Asst. U. S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.
Donald Cole Byrd (argued), Willows, Cal., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Before BROWNING, CARTER and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal by the United States from a judgment of the district court dismissing nine counts of an information filed against defendants for multiplicity. The sole issue is whether the proper unit of prosecution for the killing of ducks under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 703 et seq., is each duck killed. The district court ruled that multiple bird deaths resulting from a single transaction cannot be separately charged under the MBTA. We affirm.
The defendants were each involved in various capacities with the application of Furadan 4, a registered pesticide, to an alfalfa field which allegedly caused the death of more than 1,000 American Wigeons, a migratory duck. Corbin Farm Service is the dealer/distributor of the Furadan. John Richard Harris is an employee of Corbin who provided pesticide advice to farmers with the expectation that they would purchase from Corbin. Patrick W. Feeney is the owner of the alfalfa field which was sprayed. Frank H. Michaud, Jr., is the licensed aerial operator who sprayed the field.
The United States, contending it has prosecutorial discretion to charge a violation of the MBTA for each individual duck killed chose ten Wigeons and charged Feeney, Michaud and Harris with their deaths in ten separate counts of a twelve count information. The remaining two counts alleged violations of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq., but are unrelated to this appeal.
The defendants filed numerous pretrial motions seeking, inter alia, dismissal of nine of the ten MBTA counts for multiplicity. After extensive briefing the district court filed a lengthy opinion disposing of each of the motions. We affirm the district court and adopt its opinion on the issue of multiplicity as our own. The relevant part of the district court's opinion can be found at United...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Barone
...453 F.2d 101 [276 Pa.Super. 308] (8th Cir. 1971); United States v. Corbin Farm Service, 444 F.Supp. 510 (E.D.Cal.1978) aff'd, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978); United States v. Bowen, 428 F.Supp. 754 (D.Md.1976). As one would anticipate, the cases have reached varying results, according to whet......
-
State v. Marti
...oral statement of government's case); United States v. Corbin Farm Service, 444 F.Supp. 510, 537 (E.D.Calif.), aff'd per curiam, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978) (government information provided during oral argument); United States v. White, 386 F.Supp. 882, 885 (E.D.Wis.1974) (government's inv......
-
Mahler v. US Forest Service, NA 95-0008-C H/H.
...See United States v. Corbin Farm Service, 444 F.Supp. 510 (E.D.Cal.1978) (deciding pretrial motions), aff'd after convictions, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir.1978), and United States v. FMC Corp., 572 F.2d 902 (2d Corbin Farm Service was a criminal prosecution of a business and individuals who appli......
-
U.S. v. Moon Lake Electric Ass'n, Inc.
...migratory birds by dumping waste water); United States v. Corbin Farm Serv., 444 F.Supp. 510 (E.D.Cal.), aff'd on other grounds, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir.1978) (deaths of birds resulting from misapplication of pesticides). In FMC Corp., the Second Circuit imposed strict criminal liability for ......
-
A Murder Most Fowl: United States v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., 801 F.3d 477 (5th Cir. 2015), and Incidental Killings Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
...(E.D. Cal.) (holding killing protected migratory birds as a consequence of misusing pesticide violated the MBTA), affd on other grounds, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978); see also United States v. Moon Lake Elec. Ass'n, 45 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1076-77 (D. Colo. 1999) (holding that an electric comp......
-
ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES
...7 U.S.C. § 136l(b)(1)(A). 582. Id.; accord, e.g., United States v. Corbin Farm Serv., 444 F. Supp. 510, 519–20 (E.D. Cal. 1978), aff’d, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978). 583. 7 U.S.C. § 136j. 584. Id. § 136l(b)(1)(A). “Registrants” are persons who have registered any pesticide pursuant to this ......
-
Chopping down the birds: logging and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
...intent to violate the MBTA is not required. See United States v. Corbin Farm Serv., 444 F. Supp. 510, 536 (E.D. Cal. 1978), aff'd, 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978) (holding no intent is required to violate the MBTA); United States v. FMC Corp., 572 F.2d 902 (2d Cir. 1978) (imposing strict liabi......
-
Environmental Crimes
...572. 7 U.S.C. § 136 l (b)(1)(A). 573. Id. ; accord United States v. Corbin Farm Serv., 444 F. Supp. 510, 519–20 (E.D. Cal. 1978), aff’d , 578 F.2d 259 (9th Cir. 1978). 2023] ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES 777 1. Violation Section 136j of Title 7 of the U.S. Code establishes FIFRA’s list of “unlawful ......