UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
STEPHEN ALLEN KLEINMAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

5th Cir. | 1970-05-01
No. 26040
Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
425 F.2d 316 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, as established in Leary, should be applied to cases pending on direct appeal, even if the defense was not raised prior to sentencing.


Facts & Procedural History

Kleinman was indicted for failing to pay a marihuana transfer tax and pleaded guilty after his motion to suppress evidence was denied. He raised the F…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F. 2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F. 2d 526, Part I.

Kleinman was indicted in a single count for failing to pay the transfer tax on two pounds of marihuana in violation of Title 26, U.S.C., Section 4744(a) (1). His motion to suppress the evidence was denied, and thereafter during the progress of a non-jury trial he withdrew his plea of not guilty and entered a plea of guilty. He was sentenced1 to five years confinement under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 4208(a) (2).

Upon appeal by new counsel appointed by the court, the Leary declared Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination was asserted for the first time. His appeal was pending in this Court at the time of the Leary decision.

We held in United States v. Scardino, 5 Cir. 1969, 414 F. 2d 925, that Leary is to be applied only prospectively, but that it would be applied to Scardino whose sentence for violation of Section 4744(a) was not yet final because it was the subject of that direct appeal. We reversed and remanded for dismissal of the indictment even though Scardino did not assert the self-incrimination defense pri-or to pleading guilty, but did so just prior to being sentenced in December 1968, after revocation of probation. Scardino applies here. The judgment below is reversed and remanded with directions to dismiss the indictment.

Reversed and remanded.

. On January 12, 1968, prior to the decision of the Supreme Court in Leary v. United States, 1969, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw