UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
DAVID S. STEWART, KATHY LYNN CLEMENCE, AND DALE KEPES, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
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.
The court held that the trial judge did not err in refusing the necessity defense and that the convictions were valid despite alleged defects in Federal Register publication.
Appellants were convicted of violating federal statutes and regulations related to access control. They were arrested at an access road and raised sev…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Choice Of Evils Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
On Petition For Rehearing En Banc
SETH, Chief Judge.
These are part of a series of eighty-six appeals from convictions for violating 42 U.S.C. §§ 2278a(a) and (b) and 10 C.F.R. §§ 860.3, 860.5(a), and 860.6.
Appellants in Trial Group D were arrested at the east access road. For the facts surrounding the arrests, post-arrest and pretrial matters, see United States v. Seward, 687 F. 2d 1270 (10th Cir.), filed this date.
The specific issues raised by these appellants are as follows:
1. The trial judge erred in refusing to allow appellants to present to the jury the defense of “necessity” or “choice of evils.”
2. The convictions are invalid because the designation of boundaries in the Federal Register on April 13, 1979 fails to comply with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq., 42 U.S.C. §§ 7191 et seq., and 10 C.F.R. §§ 860.1, et seq., as well as internal DOE standards published at 44 Fed. Reg. 1032 (January 3, 1979).
3. The trial court erred in denying appellants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a crime when the publication in the Federal Register required by 10 C.F.R. § 860.7 was defective because it failed to prohibit trespassing.
The first issue is controlled by our decision in United States v. Seward. The second and third issues are controlled by our decision in United States v. Thompson, 687 F. 2d 1279 (10th Cir.), filed this date.
For the reasons set forth in those opinions, the judgments are affirmed.
For dissenting opinion of McKay, Circuit Judge, in which Logan and Seymour, Circuit Judges joined, see 687 F. 2d 1279, at p. 1286.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Seward, 687 F.2d 1270 (10th Cir. 1982)
- United States v. Thompson, 687 F.2d 1279 (10th Cir. 1982)