U.S. v. Hoyt, 87-1224
| Decision Date | 09 November 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-1224,87-1224 |
| Citation | 888 F.2d 1257 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brian HOYT, aka Brian Doyle, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Robert P. Aguilar, District Judge, Presiding.
Before BOOCHEVER and BRUNETTI *, Circuit Judges, and STEPHENS **, District Judge.
Footnote 1 on 879 F.2d 505, 506 (9th Cir.1989) should be deleted. The remaining footnotes should be renumbered.
At the end of section VII, 879 F.2d, at 514, the following text should be inserted before the section titled "Conclusion:"
VIII. Special Assessment Penalty
This circuit has held that 18 U.S.C. Section 3013 (Supp. II 1984), the special assessment statute under which Hoyt was fined, is unconstitutional as a violation of the Origination Clause of the Constitution. U.S. Const. art. I, Section 7. United States v. Munoz-Flores, 863 F.2d 654, 661 (9th Cir.1988), cert. granted, --- U.S. ----, 110 S.Ct. 48, 107 L.Ed. 2d 17 (1989).
Although Hoyt did not raise the constitutionality of the assessment in his appeal, a court of appeals may review issues sua sponte under exceptional circumstances, where substantial public interests are involved, or where to not do so would be unduly harsh to one or both of the parties. See Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce, 667 F.2d 851, 862 (9th Cir.1982) (citing Consumers Union of United States, Inc. v. FPC, 510 F.2d 656, 662 n. 10 (D.C.Cir.1975)). We therefore reverse that part of Hoyt's sentence and remand for the district court to vacate the assessment. See Shah v. United States, 878 F.2d 1156 (9th Cir.1989) ().
* Judge Brunetti was drawn to replace Judge Anderson.
** Honorable Albert Lee Stephens, Jr., Senior District Court Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Campbell
...not raised [in the briefs] by the parties when failure to do so would constitute a miscarriage of justice."); United States v. Hoyt , 888 F.2d 1257, 1258 (9th Cir. 1989) ("Although Hoyt did not raise the constitutionality of the assessment in his appeal, a court of appeals may review issues......
-
U.S. v. McNeese
...concur: United States v. Colbert, 894 F.2d 373, 375 (10th Cir.1990); United States v. Hoyt, 879 F.2d 505, 512-14, amended by 888 F.2d 1257 (9th Cir.1989); United States v. Mendoza, 876 F.2d at 641; United States v. Ramos, 861 F.2d 228, 232 (9th Cir.1988); United States v. Brown, 859 F.2d 97......
-
Garcia v. Google, Inc.
...public interests are involved, or where to not do so would be unduly harsh to one or both of the parties.” United States v. Hoyt, 888 F.2d 1257, 1258 (9th Cir.1989). The majority's failure to even engage this inquiry, instead quickly dismissing arguments against its view, confirms its error......
-
U.S. v. Hoyt
...are without jurisdiction to consider it. The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. * The Order amending this opinion is published at 888 F.2d 1257.* Judge Brunetti was drawn to replace Judge Anderson.** Honorable Albert Lee Stephens, Jr. Senior United States District Judge for the Centra......