United States v. Al Harris

Second Circuit

United States v. Al Harris

367 F.2d 826

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 9, 1967

Docket38, Docket 30600

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 367 F.2d 826 (United States v. Al Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Al Harris, 367 F.2d 826 (2d Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Once more A1 Harris has been found guilty by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for refusing to answer the questions propounded on July 31, 1963 before a grand jury and again on August 1, 1963 before Judge McLean, following a grant of immunity pursuant to the Federal Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 409 (£)•

Harris was convicted of contempt by Judge McLean pursuant to Rule 42(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and this court affirmed his conviction, 334 F.2d 460 (2 Cir. 1964). The Supreme Court reversed, 382 U.S. 162, 86 S.Ct. 352, 15 L.Ed.2d 240 (1965), and on remand Harris was tried before Judge Murphy, without a jury, in accordance with Rule 42(b), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and again found guilty. On May 16, 1966, he was sentenced to a year in jail.

Subsequent to Judge Murphy’s sentencing of Harris, the Supreme Court in Cheff v. Sehnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373, 380, 86 S.Ct. 1523, 1526, 16 L.Ed.2d 629 (1966), announced the rule that “sentences exceeding six months for criminal contempt may not be imposed by federal courts absent a jury trial or waiver thereof.”

Accordingly, as all parties concede, the district court exceeded its power in sentencing Harris to more than six months, as the finding of guilt was not made by a jury.

As we find no other error in the proceedings and no merit in any other contentions raised on this appeal, we reduce the sentence imposed by the district court from one year to six months, in the exercise of the “peculiar power of the federal courts to revise sentences in contempt cases,” Cheff v. Schnackenberg, supra at 380, 86 S.Ct. at 1526; see Green v. United States, 356 U.S. 165, 188, 78 S. Ct. 632, 2 L.Ed.2d 672 (1958); United States v. Levine, 288 F.2d 272 (2 Cir. 1961), and we affirm the judgment.

The order of the district court is modified to provide that the sentence is for imprisonment of six months.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Once more A1 Harris has been found guilty by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for refusing to answer the questions propounded on July 31, 1963 before a grand jury and again on August 1, 1963 before Judge McLean, following a grant of immunity pursuant to the Federal Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 409 (£)•

Harris was convicted of contempt by Judge McLean pursuant to Rule 42(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and this court affirmed his conviction, 334 F.2d 460 (2 Cir. 1964). The Supreme Court reversed, 382 U.S. 162, 86 S.Ct. 352, 15 L.Ed.2d 240 (1965), and on remand Harris was tried before Judge Murphy, without a jury, in accordance with Rule 42(b), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and again found guilty. On May 16, 1966, he was sentenced to a year in jail.

Subsequent to Judge Murphy’s sentencing of Harris, the Supreme Court in Cheff v. Sehnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373, 380, 86 S.Ct. 1523, 1526, 16 L.Ed.2d 629 (1966), announced the rule that “sentences exceeding six months for criminal contempt may not be imposed by federal courts absent a jury trial or waiver thereof.”

Accordingly, as all parties concede, the district court exceeded its power in sentencing Harris to more than six months, as the finding of guilt was not made by a jury.

As we find no other error in the proceedings and no merit in any other contentions raised on this appeal, we reduce the sentence imposed by the district court from one year to six months, in the exercise of the “peculiar power of the federal courts to revise sentences in contempt cases,” Cheff v. Schnackenberg, supra at 380, 86 S.Ct. at 1526; see Green v. United States, 356 U.S. 165, 188, 78 S. Ct. 632, 2 L.Ed.2d 672 (1958); United States v. Levine, 288 F.2d 272 (2 Cir. 1961), and we affirm the judgment.

The order of the district court is modified to provide that the sentence is for imprisonment of six months.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

367 F.2d 826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-al-harris-ca2-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack