United States v. Floyd Julius Patrin, Sr., United States of America v. Barbara Patrin

Good Law
575 F.2d 708·1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11581
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 20, 197877-2191, 2175California2,742 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Floyd Patrin, Sr. and Barbara Patrin were convicted by a jury of assaulting federal officers in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 . They contend that the trial court was without jurisdiction to try the case because the victims were not protected by the statutory provision under which they were indicted. We reverse.

I

On August 27, 1976, Mackenzie and O’Malley were measuring and cutting selected trees in the Nez Perce National For est pursuant to their duties as employees in the United States Forest Service. Under the direction of their supervisor, they were assisting in scientific research on the growth patterns' of Douglas Fir trees. While taking data and samples at their test site, they were confronted by Floyd Patrin, Sr., his wife Elsie, and his daughter-in-law, Barbara, all of whom were armed. The Patrins said they had an unpatented mining claim where Mackenzie and O’Malley were working, and they told the two men to leave the area.

The three Patrins were subsequently indicted for assaulting federal officers with a deadly weapon. After the jury had been selected, the Patrins unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that Mackenzie and O’Malley were not within…

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.