United States v. Frank Zielezinski, 756 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir. 1985). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Frank Zielezinski, 756 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir. 1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ussec v. Pritzker Levine LLP
9th Cir. · 2022 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. United States v. Zielezinski, 756 F.2d 1448, 1448 (9th Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (upholding the district court’s factual finding under the clearly erroneous standard because “[a] review of the record discloses nothing that compels a reversal of [the] finding as clearly erroneous”); see also United States v. Working, 224 F.3d 1093, 1102 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (“Where there are two per- missible views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous.”) (quoting Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 , 573–74 (1985)).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Whitmore
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Zielezinski, 756 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir.1985) (on appeal after remand, holding district court did not clearly err in upholding conviction where no evidence in record that grand jury’s decision was based on credibility assessment). 4.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff/Appellee,
v.
Frank ZIELEZINSKI, Defendant/Appellant
84-1286.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Apr 4, 1985.
756 F.2d 1448
Sherry P. Herrgott, Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee., Larry L. Debus, Debus, Bradford & Kazan, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant-appellant.
Goodwin, Nelson, Per Curiam, Pregerson.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Frank Zielezinski appeals from a district court judge’s order upholding his conviction for possession of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844(a) (1982). In the first appeal from his conviction, Zielezinski argued that a separate evidentiary hearing should be held to determine whether his indictment was tainted by his immunized testimony before the grand jury. This court remanded the case to the district court for a hearing at which the government was required to demonstrate that the indictment rested on sources independent of Zie-lezinski’s testimony. United States v. Zie-lezinski, 740 F.2d 727, 734 (9th Cir.1984).

Following the hearing, Judge Earl Carroll of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona issued an order upholding Zielezinski’s conviction. The judge found that the government’s sources of evidence were independent of the defendant’s immunized testimony, the government’s conduct did not threaten the integrity of the indictment by the grand jury, and that there was nothing in the record to suggest that the grand jury’s decision was based on an assessment of the defendant’s credibility.

The finding of the district court that the government’s evidence is untainted by immunized testimony must be upheld unless clearly erroneous. United States v. Rogers, 722 F.2d 557, 560 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 129, 83 L.Ed.2d 70 (1984). Defendant’s counsel conceded at the hearing that the record includes evidence of the government’s independent sources, but argued, and continues to argue in this appeal, that the indictment was tainted by the grand jury’s assessment of Zielezinski’s credibility during his immunized testimony. Judge Carroll specifically addressed this argument at the hearing. A review of the record discloses nothing that compels a reversal of Judge Carroll’s finding as clearly erroneous.

AFFIRMED.