United States v. William Steele

Good Law
461 F.2d 1148
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 9, 197271-2580California1,589 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wright, J.

After a trial to the court, appellant was convicted of violating 13 U.S.C. § 221 (a) by refusing to answer questions on the Department of Commerce census form of 1970. The court sentenced him to pay a $50 fine. We reverse.

Steele raises several points, only two of which require discussion: (1) answering the census questions would have required him to incriminate himself, and (2) the authorities singled him out for prosecution because he had publicly advocated noncompliance with census requirements.

SELF-INCRIMINATION

Appellant and six other unrelated young adults resided in a private home in Honolulu. When a census enumerator called for his questionnaire, Steele refused to answer all questions on the form and returned it to the enumerator with two pages removed. Next, a supervisor called and was similarly rebuffed. Finally, after a regional officer had tried and failed to interview Steele, the effort was abandoned. Steele testified at trial that he had refused to answer on constitutional grounds.

Steele argues that he may have been in violation of the Honolulu Zoning Code because more than five unrelated people lived in his single-family dwelling. Answering the questionnaire…

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.