U.S. v. Houltin, 74-4144
| Citation | 553 F.2d 991 |
| Decision Date | 13 June 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 74-4144,74-4144 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee. v. Martin W. HOULTIN, Robert Burke, Duane Morrison, Michael Francis, Kenneth B. Phillips, and Kenneth J. Croucher, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Lee A. Chagra, El Paso, Tex., for Houltin, Burke, Morrison & Francis.
Malcolm McGregor, El Paso, Tex., for Croucher.
Bill Ravkind, Dallas, Tex. (Court-appointed), for Phillips.
William S. Sessions, U. S. Atty., Jeremiah Handy, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Before JONES, WISDOM and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.
The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals in this cause and remanded the cause "for reconsideration in light of the position presently asserted by the government". That position is set forth in a memorandum of the Solicitor General, filed with the Supreme Court, in which he stated:
After reviewing the facts of this case, we have concluded that the offense of conspiracy to import marijuana into this country does involve a compelling federal interest that is distinct from any interest vindicated by petitioners' prior state convictions on the charge of simple possession of the drug. Accordingly, petitioners' federal prosecution for conspiracy to import marijuana has been approved by the Attorney General pursuant to Departmental guidelines and there is thus no basis for disturbing their convictions on the importation count.
We believe, however, that petitioners' prosecution for conspiracy to possess marijuana was not supported by an independent compelling federal interest in light of the substantial similarity between that charge and the offense of which petitioners were convicted in state court. We therefore respectfully request the Court to permit the effectuation of this governmental policy by granting the petition, vacating the judgment of the court of appeals only as to the charge of conspiracy to possess marijuana (count two), and remanding the case to the district court with instructions to grant the government's motion to dismiss that count. In all other respects the petition should be denied.
This Court has reconsidered the cause in light of the Solicitor General's representation.
The judgment of this Court as to the charge of conspiracy to possess marijuana (count two) is withdrawn. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Blaszczak
...the conviction and have the indictment dismissed. See , e.g. , Rinaldi , 434 U.S. at 23, 29-30, 98 S.Ct. 81 ; United States v. Houltin , 553 F.2d 991, 991-92 (5th Cir. 1977).In Gaona-Romero v. Gonzales , 497 F.3d 694 (5th Cir. 2007), a government motion seeking termination of a proceeding r......
-
U.S. v. Houltin
...1976, 525 F.2d 943, vacated in part sub nom., Croucher v. United States, 429 U.S. 1034, 97 S.Ct. 725, 50 L.Ed.2d 745, modified, 5 Cir., 1977, 553 F.2d 991. On remand, Houltin and Phillips waived a jury trial. The Government obtained an order from the district court granting use immunity to ......
-
U.S. v. Murray
...950-52 (5th Cir. 1976), vacated in part sub nom. Croucher v. United States, 429 U.S. 1034, 97 S.Ct. 725, 50 L.Ed.2d 744, modified, 553 F.2d 991 (5th Cir. 1977); United States v. Marotta, 518 F.2d 681, 684-85 (9th Cir. 1975). In contrast, two circuits have held that while it is not multiplic......
-
U.S. v. Rodriguez
...motion to dismiss that count.Memorandum by Solicitor General filed with the Supreme Court on Dec. 2, 1976, Quoted in United States v. Houltin, 553 F.2d 991 (5th Cir. 1977) (on remand). The Supreme Court accordingly vacated the case and remanded to us "for reconsideration in light of the pos......