Baird

United States v. Baird

Good Law
85 F.3d 450·96 Daily Journal DAR 6499·1996 WL 294459·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 13325·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4026
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 5, 1996No. 94-10494California2,349 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

The question in this case is whether the presence of electronic video games turns a convenience store into a “public accommodation” under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 42 U.S.C. § 2000a(b)(3). We conclude that it does.

FACTS

Several alleged white supremacists were indicted for beating two men, one black and one Hispanic, in the parking lot of a 7-11 store. The indictment was federal, for conspiracy to violate civil rights under 18 U.S.C. § 241 , and interference with federally protected activities under 18 U.S.C. § 245 (b)(2)(F). Thus, rather than being a state assault case, this was prosecuted as a civil rights case. The parties agree that an element of both counts is whether the 7-11 store is a “public accommodation” under 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, and that the government must prove that it is beyond a reasonable doubt. The parties stipulated that the court should decide as a matter of law, prior to jury trial, whether the store was a public accommodation. The court decided that it was not, so granted defendant’s motion to dismiss. The government appeals. The issue, as framed by the parties, is whether the 7-11 was a “place of ... entertainment” under 42 U.S.C. § 2000a(b)(3), and…

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.