United States v. David Arnold Feldman

Caution
92 Daily Journal DAR 16881·983 F.2d 144·1992 WL 368862·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32608·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10104
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 17, 199291-50633California440 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

This court has already ruled on Feld-man's appeal of his mail fraud conviction, affirming his conviction but vacating his sentence and remanding for resentencing. See United States v. Feldman, No. 90-50470, 949 F.2d 399 , unpub. op. (9th Cir. Dec. 5, 1991) (mandate stayed pending decision in the instant case). While the appeal on the merits was pending, Feldman moved to have the trial judge, Judge Tevrizian, recused. The recusal motion was referred to Judge Kenyon, who denied Feldman’s motion on August 19, 1991, and again on August 26, 1991 upon a motion for reconsideration. Feldman appealed September 5, 1991.

Subsequently, on September 16, 1991, Judge Tevrizian sua sponte recused himself in part from Feldman’s case. Judge Tevri-zian recused himself “only with regard to the administration of the receivership and receivership estate regarding this Court’s order of restitution” because he “own[ed] shares of stock in Security Pacific National Bank,” and “[i]n August, 1991, Bank of America and Security Pacific National Bank announced their intention to merge into a single entity.” Judge Tevrizian ruled that he would “retain jurisdiction over all other aspects of this…

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.