People v. Sandoval

Good Law
434 F.2d 635
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 5, 197125781California740 words

Opinion

Opinion

434 F.2d 635 The PEOPLE of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank Joseph SANDOVAL and James Vigil, Defendants-Petitioners-Appellants, v.The CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a Municipal Corporation, roger Arnebergh, CityAttorney thereof, Edward Davis, Chief of Police thereof, Collier McDermon, JohnDoe I to Xinclusive, and Municipal Court of Los Angeles Judicial District, the Hon. JudgeDavid I. Aisenson, Respondents-Appellees. No. 25781. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Nov. 20, 1970, Rehearing Denied Feb. 5, 1971. Manuel Ruiz (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. Howard Fox (argued), Deputy City Atty., Roger Arnebergh, City Atty., Philip E. Grey, Asst. City Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before BARNES, HUFSTEDLER and TRASK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: 1 Appellants, Frank Joseph Sandoval and James Vigil, seek reversal of an order of the district court denying their petition to remove a state criminal prosecution against them pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1443. 2 Appellants were guests at a formal banquet that was part of a program sponsored by the California Department of Education to discuss the problems of Mexican-American education. Governor Reagan of…

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.