United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald Eddie Moody, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Howard George Hollenbeck, Defendant-Appellant., 791 F.2d 707 (9th Cir. 1986)

Federal Circuits, 9th Cir. (June 06, 1986)

Docket number: 84-5379,84-5380


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/donald-eddie-moody-howard-hollenbeck-37106962
Id. vLex: VLEX-37106962

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Lee Simpson, Defendant-Appellant., 951 F.2d 364 (9th Cir. 1991)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Timothy J. Leon, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Midge Carroll, Warden, Respondent-Appellee., 980 F.2d 737 (9th Cir. 1992)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Evan Lloyd, an Individual Doing Business as Mauna Loa Jewelers, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steven Schlag, an Individual Doing Business as Dolphin Gallery, Defendant-Appellee., 884 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1989)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cyril T. Hanna, Defendant-Appellant., 55 F.3d 1456 (9th Cir. 1995)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Ronnie Monroe Howie, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert G. Borg, Warden, Respondent-Appellee., 995 F.2d 231 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James A. Berger, Defendant-Appellant., 57 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 1995)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. John Allen Cox, Petitioner-Appellant, v. B.J. Bunnell, Superintendent, California Correctional Institution, Tehachapi, Respondent-Appellee., 981 F.2d 1257 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daljit S. Gill, Defendant-Appellee., 979 F.2d 856 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Mungia, Defendant-Appellant., 967 F.2d 594 (9th Cir. 1992)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin Estrada-Plata, Defendant-Appellant., 57 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 1995)

Text:

Before WALLACE, CANBY, and BEEZER, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

The opinion, 778 F.2d 1380 (9th Cir.1985), is amended at 1385 to add the following footnote 1, with a signal after the citation to United States v. Gann.

1. Trenouth v. United States, 764 F.2d 1305 (9th Cir.1985) (Trenouth ), which was decided between Gann and Stewart, is not to the contrary. De novo review may be appropriate where, as in Trenouth, the issue is whether or not the alleged motivation for prosecution was legally permissible. The claims in Trenouth involved first amendment issues relating to the scope of the public forum doctrine and the right to picket on military reservations. We concluded that de novo review was appropriate for these "public forum and selective prosecution questions." Trenouth, 764 F.2d at 1307. To find selective prosecution in such cases requires us "to consider legal concepts"--such as the scope of constitutional rights--and, thus, "to exercise judgment about the values that animate legal principles." McConney, 728 F.2d at 1202. In other cases, such as this one, however, the existence or exercise of the constitutional right that allegedly motivated prosecution is undisputed. The question here is one of motivation itself: Was the prosecution actually motivated by exercise of the constitutional right to trial by jury? Where, as here, the primary question is one of "subjective intent" or " 'actual motive' " we deal with what amounts to " 'a pure question of fact.' " Id. at 1203, quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 289, 290, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1790, 1791, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) (Pullman-Standard ). Because such an inquiry is " 'essentially factual' " in nature, id., quoting Pullman-Standard, 456 U.S. at 288, 102 S.Ct. at 1790, and "is founded 'on the application of the fact-finding tribunal's experience with the mainsprings of human conduct,' " it warrants a standard more deferential than de novo review. Id., quoting Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 289, 80 S.Ct. 1190, 1198, 4 L.Ed.2d 1218 (1960).

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access