United States v. Harold E. Goldstein

Good Law
558 F.2d 918·1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 12328
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 25, 197776-3536California310 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

Before BARNES, WALLACE and SNEED, Circuit Judges:

After Goldstein’s motion for suppression was denied, he waived his right to a jury trial and agreed to have his guilt determined before the judge alone. He indicated that he wished to stipulate to the facts in Counts 1 through 7 in the indictment as being true and correct. The district judge requested that the government and defense attorneys prepare a stipulation of facts. This was accomplished and after the stipulation had been read, Goldstein represented affirmatively that the recitation was correct and acceptable. However, the stipulation of facts did not include the evidence which Goldstein attempted to have suppressed by his motion. Goldstein now wishes us to decide the merits of whether the district judge committed error in denying his motion to suppress evidence. Inasmuch as that evidence was not part of the facts upon which a judgment of conviction has now been entered, the matter is not before us.

The United States attorney candidly advised us during oral argument that the agreed purpose behind the stipulation leading to conviction was to preserve the opportunity for Goldstein to raise the denial of the motion to…

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.