United States v. Randall T. Quemado

Good Law
26 F.3d 920·94 Daily Journal DAR 7544·1994 WL 236793·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 13084·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4049
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 3, 199493-10093California960 words

Opinion

Opinion

Farris, J.

Opinion by Judge FARRIS.

Randall T. Quemado appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction for driving while his license was revoked in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes § 291-4.5. The district court rejected Quemado’s arguments that it lacked federal jurisdiction under the Assimi-lative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 13 (1988), and that H.R.S. § 291-4.5 is unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction of the timely appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

On February 4, 1992, Quemado appeared before a United States Magistrate Judge for arraignment and plea on a charge of violating Hawaii Revised Statute § 286-132, driving while license suspended or revoked. A federal court had jurisdiction over the case because Quemado was apprehended in a federal enclave.

The government’s subsequent investigation revealed that on November 11,1991, Quema-do’s license was administratively revoked for driving while intoxicated pursuant to H.R.S. Chapter 286, part XIV, entitled Administrative Revocation of Driver’s License. On March 31, 1992, the government amended the Information to instead charge Quemado with violating H.R.S. § 291 — 4.5, driving after license suspended or revoked for driving under…

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.