United States v. Charles Isaac Kirkland, United States of America v. Harold Edward Brown

Good Law
637 F.2d 654·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 12931
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 198079-1668, 79-1669California1,120 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

These consolidated appeals are from appellants’ convictions of conveying dangerous weapons from place to place in a prison in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1792 . We must consider two main issues. The more significant is appellant Brown’s contention that the jury was improperly instructed with regard to the elements of the crime and, specifically, the meaning of the word “conveyance.” The other issue, raised by both appellants, involves prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument. We affirm Kirkland’s conviction since the impropriety of the prosecutor’s statement did not require declaration of a mistrial. We agree with Brown that an improper definition in the instruction requires reversal of his conviction.

Charges against both appellants stemmed from a prison disturbance at the Federal Correctional Institution at Lompoc, California, where both appellants were serving prison terms. A prison guard testified that he saw Kirkland running from the scene with a metal bar, that Kirkland actually struck him with the bar, and that the guard chased, caught and handcuffed Kirkland. Another guard witnessed the last part of the chase and helped subdue Kirkland. Kirkland testified that he had…

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.