United States v. Peterson, 25909.
| Decision Date | 22 March 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 25909.,25909. |
| Citation | 435 F.2d 1313 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alvin Harrison PETERSON, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
James A. Alfieri, of McDonell & Alfieri, Seattle, Wash., for appellant.
Stan Pitkin, U. S. Atty., William H. Rubidge, J. Byron Holcomb, Asst. U. S. Attys., Seattle, Wash., for appellee.
Before KOELSCH, CARTER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.
The "concurrent sentences" rule first announced in Sinclair v. United States, 279 U.S. 263, 299, 49 S.Ct. 268, 73 L.Ed. 692 (1929) and consistently adhered to by the Supreme Court (Lawn v. United States, 355 U.S. 339, 359, 78 S.Ct. 311, 2 L.Ed.2d 321 (1958), Greene v. United States, 358 U.S. 326, 330, 79 S.Ct. 340, 3 L.Ed.2d 340 (1959)) makes unnecessary any examination into appellant's sole assignment of error which attacks the validity of one of several convictions under a multi-count indictment.
We have nevertheless considered the assignment; granted the criticized instruction should not have been given, the conclusion is manifest that the error was harmless. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967).
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Wing
...if the convictions are to stand on Counts One and Two. United States v. Newton, 442 F.2d 622, 623 (9th Cir. 1971); United States v. Peterson, 435 F.2d 1313 (9th Cir. 1971); and cf.: Feldstein v. United States, 429 F.2d 1092, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 1970), and Zaragoza-Almeida v. United States, 42......
-
United States v. Newton
...we need not consider the validity of the conviction on Count 1. United States v. Jack, 435 F.2d 317 (9th Cir. 1970); United States v. Peterson, 435 F.2d 1313 (9th Cir. 1971). ...