United States v. Fulbright
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
105 F.3d 443 (1997)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Ronald Fulbright (defendant) was a farmer who filed for bankruptcy. His attempt to receive bankruptcy protection failed. He mailed two documents to the judge who presided over his bankruptcy matters, Judge John Peterson. The first document, a Notice and Demand for Declaration of Judge’s Impartiality, accused Judge Peterson of numerous crimes. This document was mailed on April 16, 1993, shortly after Judge Peterson recused himself from Fulbright’s bankruptcy case but before the case was dismissed on May 10, 1993. The period for appeal was ten days, which began when the case was dismissed. The second document, a Citizens’ Arrest Warrant for Citizens’ Arrest, was filed in the bankruptcy court on June 2, 1993, 23 days after Fulbright’s case was dismissed. Fulbright intended this document to authorize the arrest of Judge Peterson by peace officers. Fulbright was charged with obstruction of justice by intimidating or injuring federal officers in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503, in addition to two related other crimes. The judge presiding over Fulbright’s criminal trial instructed the jury that it could convict Fulbright based on either the notice or the warrant. Fulbright was convicted and sentenced to 27 months in prison. The jury did not indicate on which document Fulbright’s conviction was based. Fulbright appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hawkins, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.