Legal Opinion
United States v. Edwin Houtchens
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 14, 1991No. 90-50052PublishedCited by 77 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALLACE, Chief Judge:
Houtchens appeals from his conviction of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and 18 U.S.C. § 2314. Houtchens contends that the district judge erred by trying him in absentia, that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, and that the district judge failed to make required findings at sentencing. The district court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
I
On May 7, 1986, Houtchens and Tucker were indicted for mail and wire fraud for their solicitation of investments in a phony oil drilling…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. Winston Bryant McConneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Diaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by77 opinions
- United States v. BenabeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
- United States v. James Daychild, United States of America v. Patrick O. NeissCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- United States v. Jose Luis NunezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- United States v. SittonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Charles Laughlin, AKA Charles William Laughlin, John Tracy LaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.