Summary
reversing misprision conviction where defendant was simultaneously involved in bank robbery at the moment when her duty to report the crime arose, and reasoning that Fifth Amendment must prevail in collision with misprision statute
Summary of this case from U.S. v. WeekleyOpinion
No. 71-1377.
December 10, 1971.
Earl E. Boyd, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Asst. U.S. Atty. and Chief, Crim. Div., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Alvin S. Michaelson (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Before CHAMBERS, WRIGHT and CHOY, Circuit Judges.
The judgment of conviction for misprision of a felony (a bank robbery) is reversed. The problem with the case is the element of not notifying the officers.
Our analysis of the facts indicates Miss Pigott's simultaneous involvement in the crime at the moment when her duty to notify could have arisen. But at that point we have a collision with the Fifth Amendment and the latter must prevail.
The defendant was convicted of the wrong crime.
The indictment should be dismissed.