United States v. Steven Darrell Diamond

Caution
53 F.3d 249·95 Daily Journal DAR 4876·1995 WL 225496·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 8829·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2810
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 18, 199594-30279California2,015 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rymer, J.

This appeal requires us to decide whether a local law enforcement officer who is cross-deputized as a special United States marshal and acting at the direction of a federal agent loses the protection of 18 U.S.C. § 111 because he was assaulted while intervening in a state law crime. We hold that such an officer is protected by 18 U.S.C. § 111 .

Steven Darrell Diamond appeals his sentence and conviction for assaulting a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 . He contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction and that the government failed to prove the charged offense because the person Diamond allegedly assaulted was not a federal officer within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §§ 111 and 1114. Diamond also contends that because the evidence failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to assault Strovink, the district court erred in denying his motion for acquittal. Finally, Diamond argues that his plea bargain, which would have credited him for time served in state facilities, did not violate Ninth Circuit law and should have been specifically enforced. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I

James E. Strovink is a Clackamas County…

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.