United States v. Harry Humphries

Good Law
728 F.3d 1028·43 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20210·13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9609·2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18066
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 29, 201311-50383California1,974 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fisher, J.

Harry Humphries was convicted by jury trial of one count of illegally storing hazardous wastes without a permit in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(2). Humphries appeals his conviction, arguing that the district court improperly instructed the jury about the distinction between “storage” and “disposal” of hazardous waste in response to a jury inquiry. We hold that the district court properly instructed the jury that, for purposes of RCRA, “disposal” of hazardous waste begins not with an individual’s subjective decision to dispose but with an act of disposal. We therefore affirm Hum-phries’ conviction.

Background

Starting in the early 1990s, Humphries was part-owner of a company that manufactured and blended chemicals. The company’s manufacturing processes produced used toluene and excess methanol. The company stored the used toluene and excess methanol at its facility, which was located in a building it rented from a third-party owner.

In late 2005, the owner sold the building, forcing Humphries’ company to shut down and move out. Chemicals that had been stored on-site, including the used toluene and excess methanol,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.