Summary
This Ninth Circuit opinion affirms the convictions of multiple defendants who unlawfully reentered a naval submarine base after receiving exclusion orders following anti-Trident missile protests. The court addresses several appeals, ruling that the maximum six-month statutory penalty obviated the need for a grand jury indictment or a jury trial, even considering potential Youth Corrections Act sentencing. Additionally, the court upheld the admission of apprehension data cards and photographs as non-hearsay circumstantial evidence and rejected affirmative defenses of necessity and international law justification.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a grand‑jury indictment is required for a violation of 18 U.S.C. §1382.
- Whether the defendants are entitled to a jury trial when the maximum possible sentence is six months.
- Whether the bar letters sufficiently gave notice to preclude reentry and support conviction.
- Whether photographs and Apprehension Data Cards are admissible evidence.
- Whether the necessity defense is available.
- Whether an international‑law defense is available.
Holdings
- An information, not a grand‑jury indictment, is sufficient because the offense carries a maximum penalty of six months and is not an "infamous" crime.
- A jury trial is not required because the district court limited the potential sentence to six months, eliminating the need for a jury under the Sixth Amendment.
- The bar letters gave adequate notice; convictions based on reentry after receipt of the letters are valid.
- The photographs and data cards are admissible; they are not hearsay and are proper circumstantial evidence of identity and presence.
- The necessity defense fails because the defendants did not have a reasonable belief that their conduct would prevent the alleged harm.
- The international‑law defense is rejected; the defendants offered no concrete injury and their argument is abstract.
Factual background
Protesters assembled at the Naval Submarine Base in Bangor, Washington in May 1978, climbed the perimeter fence, were taken into custody, served with "bar letters" prohibiting reentry, and later reentered the base. The defendants were charged under 18 U.S.C. §1382 for unlawful reentry.
Procedural history
The district court tried the consolidated actions, found most defendants guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. §1382, imposed suspended sentences and probation, and stayed custodial sentences pending appeal. The defendants appealed on several grounds including indictment, jury trial, sufficiency of bar letters, admissibility of evidence, and affirmative defenses.