Anderson

United States v. Anderson

Good Law
74 F. App'x 768
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 2003No. 02-35666California743 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*769 MEMORANDUM *

James Anderson seeks recovery of attorneys fees under the Hyde Amendment, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, arguing that he spent over $128,000 defending against eight allegedly “vexatious” and “frivolous” criminal charges that were dismissed before trial. Anderson had been indicted, along with a business partner, Kim Powell, and two others, for the fraudulent sale of a reconstructed military helicopter. The district court denied Anderson’s Hyde Amendment motion, concluding that there was no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. We have jurisdiction to hear Anderson’s appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . After a careful review of the record, we affirm.

We review a district court’s Hyde Amendment ruling for abuse of discretion. United States v. Sherburne, 249 F.3d 1121, 1125 (9th Cir.2001). The Hyde Amendment provides prevailing criminal defendants with attorney’s fees and litigation costs where “the position of the United States” is found to be “vexatious, frivolous, or in bad faith____” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. As we held in Sherburne , “[t]he Hyde Amendment permits fees to be recouped ... when the prosecution was unwarranted because it was intended to harass and without sufficient…

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.