United States v. Harris

Second Circuit

United States v. Harris

224 F.2d 716

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJuly 21, 1955

DocketNo. 58, Docket 23153

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 224 F.2d 716 (United States v. 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. Harris, 224 F.2d 716 (2d Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Harris was neither given a résumé of the F.B.I. report on his claimed status as a conscientious objector, nor was he furnished with a copy of the recommendation of the Department of Justice in his case. Thus he was not afforded an adequate opportunity in the administrative hearings to rebut the adverse information and conclusions which these reports contained. These were procedural errors which the Supreme Court has held in decisions announced subsequent to the conviction, to constitute a deprivation of the fundamental right to a fair hearing, and consequently vitiate the administrative decision thus arrived at. Simmons v. United States, 348 U.S. 397, 75 S.Ct. 397; Gonzales v. United States, 348 U.S. 407, 75 S.Ct. 409.

The judgment of conviction is reversed and the case remanded for the entry of a judgment of acquittal,

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Harris was neither given a résumé of the F.B.I. report on his claimed status as a conscientious objector, nor was he furnished with a copy of the recommendation of the Department of Justice in his case. Thus he was not afforded an adequate opportunity in the administrative hearings to rebut the adverse information and conclusions which these reports contained. These were procedural errors which the Supreme Court has held in decisions announced subsequent to the conviction, to constitute a deprivation of the fundamental right to a fair hearing, and consequently vitiate the administrative decision thus arrived at. Simmons v. United States, 348 U.S. 397, 75 S.Ct. 397; Gonzales v. United States, 348 U.S. 407, 75 S.Ct. 409.

The judgment of conviction is reversed and the case remanded for the entry of a judgment of acquittal,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 F.2d 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-harris-ca2-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack