United States v. Clinton Harless, AKA Stephen Lisnak, AKA Alexander Dyle

Good Law
464 F.2d 953·1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 8474
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 12, 197271-2789California2,206 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kilkenny, J.

Raising certain constitutional questions with reference to search and sei zure and confrontation, and other issues with reference to procedure, Harless appeals his adjudication as a juvenile delinquent under 18 U.S.C. § 5031 et seq.

BACKGROUND

Due to a misrepresentation as to his age, appellant was indicted on November 2, 1970, for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708 (possession of a stolen postal money order). He was tried by a jury and found guilty on June 19, 1971. On August 23, 1971, it was learned that appellant was a juvenile at the time of the commission of the offense and the judgment was set aside. Prior to trial, a motion to suppress and other motions were denied. Judge Tavares was in charge of all these proceedings.

On September 7, 1971, after a hearing at which time he was informed of his rights as a juvenile, appellant elected to be treated as a juvenile under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. §§ 5032 and 5033. An information was then filed charging appellant with the offense of juvenile delinquency in connection with the violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708 . He again filed motions to suppress and a motion to exclude the testimony of one Herman Oliverra, taken on the previous motion…

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.