United States v. George Dadanian and Jean Dadanian

Ninth Circuit

United States v. George Dadanian and Jean Dadanian

856 F.2d 1391, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738, 1988 WL 92464

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 9, 1988·No. 85-5095, 85-5248·Published·Cited by 61 cases

Opinion

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge:

The petition for rehearing is granted.

We have reexamined our opinion, 818 F.2d 1443 (9th Cir.1987), in light of the subsequent case of McNally v. United States, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 2875, 97 L.Ed.2d 292 (1987). We conclude that McNally was violated and that the failure to instruct the jury on the “property” element was not harmless error. See Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3107-09, 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497, 107 S.Ct. 1918, 1921-22, 95 L.Ed.2d 439 (1987). We also conclude that the Dadanians’ scheme to obtain the gambling license did not affect the City of Bell’s interests as a property-holder. See McNally, 107 S.Ct. at 2881 n. 8. Cf. Carpenter v. United States, — U.S. —, 108 S.Ct. 316, 98 L.Ed.2d 275 (1987). Moreover, the other convictions fail to supply the “property” element required under the mail fraud statute. See McNally, 107 S.Ct. at 2880-81. The Dadanians’ convictions for mail fraud are reversed.

However, the judgment against defendants still stands as to counts ten, eleven, and twelve. The sentences on counts ten, eleven and twelve will remain intact. The court will vacate the sentences on the mail fraud counts.

The court disregards the request for rehearing en banc without prejudice to any party filing another petition for rehearing on the case as now modified.

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

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge:

The petition for rehearing is granted.

We have reexamined our opinion, 818 F.2d 1443 (9th Cir.1987), in light of the subsequent case of McNally v. United States, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 2875, 97 L.Ed.2d 292 (1987). We conclude that McNally was violated and that the failure to instruct the jury on the “property” element was not harmless error. See Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3107-09, 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497, 107 S.Ct. 1918, 1921-22, 95 L.Ed.2d 439 (1987). We also conclude that the Dadanians’ scheme to obtain the gambling license did not affect the City of Bell’s interests as a property-holder. See McNally, 107 S.Ct. at 2881 n. 8. Cf. Carpenter v. United States, — U.S. —, 108 S.Ct. 316, 98 L.Ed.2d 275 (1987). Moreover, the other convictions fail to supply the “property” element required under the mail fraud statute. See McNally, 107 S.Ct. at 2880-81. The Dadanians’ convictions for mail fraud are reversed.

However, the judgment against defendants still stands as to counts ten, eleven, and twelve. The sentences on counts ten, eleven and twelve will remain intact. The court will vacate the sentences on the mail fraud counts.

The court disregards the request for rehearing en banc without prejudice to any party filing another petition for rehearing on the case as now modified.

United States v. George Dadanian and Jean Dadanian, 856 F.2d 1391, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738, 1988 WL 92464 (9th Cir. 1988).

Pincite

856 F.2d 1391 (United States v. George Dadanian and Jean Dadanian) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related