United States v. Harry Bechtel

547 F.2d 1379, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 14716
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 16, 1977
Docket76-2701
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 547 F.2d 1379 (United States v. Harry Bechtel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. Harry Bechtel, 547 F.2d 1379, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 14716 (9th Cir. 1977).

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

This court has been advised that the appellant died in Mesa, Arizona on December 20, 1976, while direct review of his criminal conviction was pending. Had Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481, 91 S.Ct. 858, 28 L.Ed.2d 200 (1971), been overruled in its entirety by Dove v. United States, 423 U.S. 325, 96 S.Ct. 579, 46 L.Ed.2d 531 (1976), the question whether the cause should be remanded to the district court as law and justice require might now be an open one. We do not understand Dove v. United States, however, as overturning the rule that “death pending direct review of a criminal conviction abates not only the appeal but also all proceedings had in the prosecution from its inception.” Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. at 483, 91 S.Ct. at 860. We read Dove as controlling only the disposition of petitions for certiorari in the Supreme Court.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and the cause is remanded to the district court with directions to dismiss the indictment.

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

Related

United States v. Reynolds
98 F.4th 62 (First Circuit, 2024)
Commonwealth v. Hernandez
118 N.E.3d 107 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2019)
State of Arizona v. Richard J. Glassel
312 P.3d 1119 (Arizona Supreme Court, 2013)
State v. Hoxsie
1997 SD 119 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1997)
Gollott v. State
646 So. 2d 1297 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1994)
State v. Dalman
520 N.W.2d 860 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1994)
Berry v. Judges of the United States Army Court of Military Review
37 M.J. 158 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1993)
United States v. Robert C. Tinkham
979 F.2d 857 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Pueblo v. Morales Díaz
120 P.R. Dec. 249 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1987)
United States v. Chin
633 F. Supp. 624 (E.D. Virginia, 1986)
Jones v. State
486 A.2d 184 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1985)
United States v. William Dudley
739 F.2d 175 (Fourth Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Marcel Raymond Oberlin
718 F.2d 894 (Ninth Circuit, 1983)
United States v. Riccobene
709 F.2d 214 (Third Circuit, 1983)
United States v. Roettger
16 M.J. 536 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1983)
Howell v. United States
455 A.2d 1371 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1983)
United States v. Rick Pauline
625 F.2d 684 (Fifth Circuit, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
547 F.2d 1379, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 14716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-harry-bechtel-ca9-1977.