United States v. Thomas Pearson

Good Law
2001 Daily Journal DAR 13029·274 F.3d 1225·2001 WL 1605963·32 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20363·53 ERC (BNA) 1838
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 200100-30086California3,959 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

Appellant, Thomas Pearson (“Pearson”), was convicted of violating criminal provi sions of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7412 (f)(4) and (h), and 7413(c)(1). Pearson appeals his conviction on several grounds. First, he contends the district court improperly instructed the jury regarding the elements of the charged offense. Next, Pearson asserts the district court prohibited him from presenting a defense by improperly sustaining objections to his testimony during direct examination. Finally, Pearson challenges the sentencing enhancements applied pursuant to §§ 2Q1.2(b)(1)(B) and 2Q1.2(b)(2) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”).

We affirm the district court’s rulings.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In 1995, the Navy embarked on a project to remove asbestos-containing material, as part of an upgrade and renovation of the Central Heating Plant at the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station. The Navy contracted with Metcalf Grimm to carry out the renovations. Metcalf Grimm, in turn, subcontracted with Environmental Maintenance Service, Inc. (“EMS”) to conduct both the asbestos abatement and the demolition work.

Work on the project took place in three phases, only the third…

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.