green
Positive treatment
6.5 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. Vasquez
(2×)
Pierre v. State, 96 Nev. 887, 890-892 (1980), quoting United States v. Wanger, 426 F.2d 1360, 1360 (9th Cir. 1970) (excusing failure to object where State court’s interpretation of Federal Constitution was binding on trial court at time of trial, but was abrogated by Supreme Court while case was on direct appeal; objection “would have been futile” as erroneous jury instruction “had been upheld by this court on prior occasions”; court refused to fault defendant or his attorney for failure to object to instructions “which applied the law as it was firmly established” or to request …
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. John Joseph Powers
See United States v. Wanger, 426 F.2d 1360 (9th Cir. 1970).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
William Walter WANGER, Appellant
v.
William Walter WANGER, Appellant
24673.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
May 8, 1970.
Wesley C. Blake (argued), San Diego, Cal., for appellant., Brian E. Michaels (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Harry D. Steward, U. S. Atty., Warren P. Reese, Chief Asst. U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for appellee.
Duniway, Ely, Byrne.
Cited by 13 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of conviction is vacated, and the cause is remanded for a new trial. Wade v. United States, 426 F.2d 64 (9th Cir. Mar. 30, 1970).
The appellant did not forfeit his rights under Wade by failing to object to jury instructions which applied the law as it was firmly established prior to Wade, nor should he be penalized for his attorney’s not having requested jury instructions which, at the time of his trial, would have been inconsistent with the law as it then existed. Compare United States v. Scott, 425 F.2d 55 (9th Cir. Mar. 6, 1970).