United States v. Sybil Schiff, 874 F.2d 705 (9th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Sybil Schiff, 874 F.2d 705 (9th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Hickey (ca9, 2005-03-08)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Hickey
9th Cir. · 2005 · confidence medium
The Supreme Court and this court have repeatedly rejected appeals from similar pre-trial orders.5 5 See Midland, 489 U.S. at 801 (holding that motion to dismiss grand jury indictment for alleged violation of rule prohibiting public disclosure of matters occurring before grand jury was not appealable before trial); United States v. Moreno-Green, 881 F.2d 680, 684 (9th Cir. 1989) (hold- ing that order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss indictment on basis of alleged prosecutorial misconduct before grand jury was not appealable before trial); United States v. Shah, 878 F.2d 272, 275 (9th Cir…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. John A. Hickey
9th Cir. · 2004 · confidence medium
See Midland, 489 U.S. at 801 , 109 S.Ct. 1494 (holding that motion to dismiss grand jury indictment for alleged violation of rule prohibiting public disclosure of matters occurring before grand jury was not appealable before trial); United States v. Moreno-Green, 881 F.2d 680, 684 (9th Cir.1989) (holding that order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss indictment on basis of alleged prosecutorial misconduct before grand jury was not appeal-able before trial); United States v. Shah, 878 F.2d 272, 275 (9th Cir.1989) (concluding that orders refusing to dismiss indictment for alleged grand jury …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. David R. Benjamin Philip C. Bourdette Miriam R. Bourdette Cecilia Jason Dederich Dan L. Garrett, Jr. Elizabeth Missakian Sybil Schiff Steven Simon Dan Sorkin, Defendants- United States of America v. David R. Benjamin, Philip C. Bourdette, Miriam R. Bourdette, Cecilia Jason Dederich Dan L. Garrett, Jr. Elizabeth Missakian Steven Simon, Dan Sorkin
9th Cir. · 1989 · confidence medium
United States v. Schiff, 874 F.2d 705, 706 (9th Cir.1989). 3 Accordingly, we hold that we lack jurisdiction over the appeal from the denial of the motions to dismiss the indictment considered in Benjamin III.
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Benjamin
9th Cir. · 1989 · confidence medium
United States v. Schiff, 874 F.2d 705, 706 (9th Cir.1989).
discussed Cited "see" In re: Grand Jury
D.C. Cir. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Schiff, 874 F.2d 705, 706 (9th Cir.1989); In re 1985 Grand Jury Proceedings, 785 F.2d 593, 594-95 (8th Cir.1985); In re Grand Jury Matter Impounded, 703 F.2d 56, 59-60 (3d Cir.1983). 2 .
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Roosevelt Taylor, Jr.
9th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Id., quoting Coopers & Lybrand, 437 U.S. at 468 , 98 S.Ct. at 2458 ; see also United States v. Schiff, 874 F.2d 705, 706 (9th Cir.1989) (amended July 20, 1989).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Sybil SCHIFF, Defendant-Appellant
88-1329.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jul 20, 1989.
874 F.2d 705
Mark E. Overland, Overland, Berke, Wesley, Gits, Randolph & Levanas, Los Angeles, Cal, Robert D. Luskin, Washington, D.C., for defendant-appellant., William C. Brown, General Litigation and Legal Advice Section, Crim. Div., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee.
Choy, Sneed, Noonan.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
SNEED, Circuit Judge:

Schiff appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion to dismiss the indictment and motion for disclosure of grand jury transcripts. We dismiss the appeal.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

This appeal is a result of a Justice Department investigation of the Synanon Church. This court has already heard several appeals by Ms. Schiff s codefendants. See United States v. Benjamin, 852 F.2d 413 (9th Cir.1988); United States v. Dederich, 825 F.2d 1317 (9th Cir.1987); United States v. Benjamin, 812 F.2d 548 (9th Cir.1987) (Benjamin I).

Ms. Schiff and eight codefendants are charged in a twenty-two count indictment with conspiracy, concealment of material facts, obstruction of justice, and perjury. Schiff filed a motion to dismiss the indictment based on prosecutorial misconduct. She alleges that the government engaged in “privilege harassment” by subpoenaing her to testify before the grand jury knowing she would invoke her Fifth Amendment privilege. She also appeals the district court’s denial of her motion to produce grand jury transcripts.

II.

JURISDICTION

The district court had jurisdiction over this case under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 (1982). Our jurisdiction turns on whether we have jurisdiction to entertain an interlocutory appeal. The Supreme Court recently held that an order denying a motion to dismiss the indictment for a violation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e) is not an appealable collateral order. See Midland Asphalt v. United States, — U.S. —, —, 109 S.Ct. 1494, 1498, 103 L.Ed.2d 879 (1989). Its reasoning provides no basis for concluding that an order denying a motion for discovery is an appealable collateral order while an order denying a motion to dismiss the indictment is not. Nor do Schiff’s objections justify an interlocutory appeal by implicating the grand jury clause of the Fifth Amendment. “Only a defect so fundamental that it causes the grand jury no longer to be a grand jury, or the indictment to be an indictment, gives rise to the constitutional right not to be tried.” Id. at 1499-1500.

Accordingly, we hold that we lack jurisdiction to entertain Schiff's appeal of the district court’s order denying her motion to dismiss the indictment.

APPEAL DISMISSED.