United States v. Roach, David ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    for the district of columbia circuit
    No. 96-3119                                  September Term, 1997
    United States of America,
    Appellee
    v.
    David Roach,
    Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Columbia
    (No. 96ms0020)
    Before: Edwards, Chief Judge, Wald and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
    O R D E R
    On April 1, 1997, this court issued an opinion upholding the conviction of appellant David
    Roach under 18 U.S.C.  401(3) (1994).  United States v. Roach, 
    108 F.3d 1477
     (D.C. Cir.),
    cert. denied, 
    118 S. Ct. 446
     (1997).  In the opinion, we rejected Roach's argument that he was
    denied a jury trial in violation of the Sixth Amendment.  Id. at 1484.  On December 19, 1997, in a
    case involving another employee of the Department of Corrections, Dr. Anthony Rapone, who
    was also convicted of criminal contempt under 18 U.S.C.  401(3), another panel of this court
    held that the defendant was entitled to a jury trial under 42 U.S.C.  2000h (1994) ("In any
    proceeding for criminal contempt arising under title II, III, IV, V, VI, or VII of [the Civil Rights
    Act of 1964], the accused, upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to a trial by jury, which shall
    conform as near as may be to the practice in criminal cases.").  United States v. Rapone, 
    131 F.3d 188
    , 195-97 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
    Although Roach did not argue before us that he had a statutory right to a jury trial, we
    believe that in light of this court's decision in Rapone, Roach should receive a jury trial under 42
    U.S.C.  2000(h).  Because we would not have reached the issue had we originally granted Roach
    a jury trial under this statute, we vacate the portion of our previous decision in Roach dealing
    with Roach's constitutional right to a jury trial.  Roach, 
    108 F.3d at 1484
    .  We also vacate those
    portions of the opinion addressing the sufficiency of the evidence against Roach, 
    id. at 1481-82
    ,
    and Roach's sentencing, 
    id. at 1484-85
    .  All other portions of the opinion shall remain unaffected
    by this order.
    Per Curiam.
    FOR THE COURT:
    Mark J. Langer, Clerk
    Filed on February 19, 1998
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-3119

Filed Date: 2/27/1998

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014