United States v. Corbin Farm Service, Patrick William Feeney, Frank Harry Michaud, Jr., and John Richard Harris

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Corbin Farm Service, Patrick William Feeney, Frank Harry Michaud, Jr., and John Richard Harris

578 F.2d 259, 8 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20615, 12 ERC (BNA) 1310, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 10216, 12 ERC 1310

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 12, 1978·No. 78-1286·Published·Cited by 23 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the United States from a judgment of the district court dismissing nine counts of an information filed against defendants for multiplicity. The sole issue is whether the proper unit of prosecution for the killing of ducks under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 703 et seq., is each duck killed. The district court ruled that multiple bird deaths resulting from a single transaction cannot be separately charged under the MBTA. We affirm.

The defendants were each involved in various capacities with the application of Furadan 4, a registered pesticide, to an alfalfa field which allegedly caused the death of more than 1,000 American Wigeons, a migratory duck. Corbin Farm Service is the dealer/distributor of the Fura-dan. John Richard Harris is an employee of Corbin who provided pesticide advice to farmers with the expectation that they would purchase from Corbin. Patrick W. Feeney is the owner of the alfalfa field which was sprayed. Frank H. Michaud, Jr., is the licensed aerial operator who sprayed the field.

The United States, contending it has prosecutorial discretion to charge a violation of the MBTA for each individual duck killed chose ten Wigeons and charged Feeney, Michaud and Harris with their deaths in ten separate counts of a twelve count information. The remaining two counts alleged violations of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq,, but are unrelated to this appeal.

. The defendants filed numerous pretrial motions seeking, inter alia, dismissal of nine of the ten MBTA counts for multiplicity. After extensive briefing the district court filed a lengthy opinion disposing of each of the motions. We affirm the district court and adopt its opinion on the issue of multiplicity as our own. The relevant part of the district court’s opinion can be found at United States v. Corbin Farm Service, et al., 444 F.Supp. 510, 527-31 (E.D.Cal.1978) (We adopt the district court’s decision beginning with “(1) Multiplicity” at the top of 444 F.Supp. 527 and continuing through the first full paragraph of the second column at 444 F.Supp. 531, ending with the sentence: “Accordingly, nine of the ten counts brought against defendants Harris, Feeney and Michaud under the MBTA are dismissed.”).

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the United States from a judgment of the district court dismissing nine counts of an information filed against defendants for multiplicity. The sole issue is whether the proper unit of prosecution for the killing of ducks under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 703 et seq., is each duck killed. The district court ruled that multiple bird deaths resulting from a single transaction cannot be separately charged under the MBTA. We affirm.

The defendants were each involved in various capacities with the application of Furadan 4, a registered pesticide, to an alfalfa field which allegedly caused the death of more than 1,000 American Wigeons, a migratory duck. Corbin Farm Service is the dealer/distributor of the Fura-dan. John Richard Harris is an employee of Corbin who provided pesticide advice to farmers with the expectation that they would purchase from Corbin. Patrick W. Feeney is the owner of the alfalfa field which was sprayed. Frank H. Michaud, Jr., is the licensed aerial operator who sprayed the field.

The United States, contending it has prosecutorial discretion to charge a violation of the MBTA for each individual duck killed chose ten Wigeons and charged Feeney, Michaud and Harris with their deaths in ten separate counts of a twelve count information. The remaining two counts alleged violations of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq,, but are unrelated to this appeal.

. The defendants filed numerous pretrial motions seeking, inter alia, dismissal of nine of the ten MBTA counts for multiplicity. After extensive briefing the district court filed a lengthy opinion disposing of each of the motions. We affirm the district court and adopt its opinion on the issue of multiplicity as our own. The relevant part of the district court’s opinion can be found at United States v. Corbin Farm Service, et al., 444 F.Supp. 510, 527-31 (E.D.Cal.1978) (We adopt the district court’s decision beginning with “(1) Multiplicity” at the top of 444 F.Supp. 527 and continuing through the first full paragraph of the second column at 444 F.Supp. 531, ending with the sentence: “Accordingly, nine of the ten counts brought against defendants Harris, Feeney and Michaud under the MBTA are dismissed.”).

AFFIRMED.

United States v. Corbin Farm Service, Patrick William Feeney, Frank Harry Michaud, Jr., and John Richard Harris, 578 F.2d 259, 8 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20615, 12 ERC (BNA) 1310, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 10216, 12 ERC 1310 (9th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

578 F.2d 259 (United States v. Corbin Farm Service, Patrick William Feeney, Frank Harry Michaud, Jr., and John Richard Harris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Seattle Audubon Society v. John L. Evans, in His Official Capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, Seattle Audubon Society v. United States Forest Service, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. Seattle Audubon Society v. John L. Evans, in His Official Capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants. Portland Audubon Society v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., in His Official Capacity as Secretary of Interior, and Northwest Forest Resource Council, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. (Two Cases)

952 F.2d 297 (Ninth Circuit, 1991)

United States v. Meyer

602 F. Supp. 1480 (S.D. California, 1985)

United States v. St. Pierre

578 F. Supp. 1424 (D. South Dakota, 1983)

Junco v. Conover

682 F.2d 1338 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)

United States v. New England Grocers Supply Co.

488 F. Supp. 230 (D. Massachusetts, 1980)

State v. Marti

290 N.W.2d 570 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1980)

Commonwealth v. Barone

419 A.2d 457 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1980)

Quick v. State

599 P.2d 712 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1979)

Opinion

Related