United States v. Homer Lee Tucker

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 6790·964 F.2d 952·1992 WL 104414·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 11151·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4297
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 20, 199287-5090California2,227 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leavy, J.

In this case we are called upon to decide whether our supervisory power should be applied to reverse a criminal conviction on the ground that extreme delay in filing a trial transcript resulted in a denial of the appellant’s due process rights. We reject the government’s argument that there was no due process violation and therefore no ground for exercising our supervisory power, and reverse the conviction.

PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

On May 7, 1986, a federal grand jury handed down a ten-count indictment charging Homer Lee Tucker (“Tucker” or “appellant”) and Edwin Dale Houtchens (“Houtchens”) with wire fraud ( 18 U.S.C. § 1343 , eight counts) and interstate transfer of funds obtained through fraud ( 18 U.S.C. § 2314 , two counts) arising out of their scheme to induce California residents to invest in a fraudulent Texas oil drilling lease. Tucker entered a plea of not guilty to all ten counts, and trial was set for November 4, 1986.

When Houtchens failed to appear, the district court continued the trial to November 25, 1986. Houtchens’ subsequent failures to show led to further continuances until, on January 27, 1987, Tucker proceeded to trial along with his eodefendant, who was tried…

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.