U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1971

Ernest Harvey Olsen, and v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 6, 1971 · Chambers, Hufstedler, Per Curiam, Thompson

446 F.2d 912 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mark B. Raven (argued), of Risner, Wolf & Raven, Tucson, Ariz., for petitioner-appellant., Garvin Lee Oliver (argued), Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Richard K. Burke, U. S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Gelbard v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1972)
United States v. In re Linda Marie Reynolds, Witness Before Special Grand Jury (9th Cir. 1971)
In the Matter of Sylvia Jane Brown, a Witness Before the United States Grand Jury v. United States (9th Cir. 1972)
In the Matter of Rockney Lee Reed, a Witness Before the Special Grand Jury v. United States (9th Cir. 1971)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

446 F.2d 912

Ernest Harvey OLSEN, Petitioner and Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Respondent.

No. 71-2081.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 6, 1971.

Mark B. Raven (argued), of Risner, Wolf & Raven, Tucson, Ariz;, for petitioner-appellant.

Garvin Lee Oliver (argued), Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Richard K. Burke, U.S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for appellee.

Before CHAMBERS and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON,^* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The order adjudging Olsen guilty of civil contempt is affirmed.

This court's stay of the district court's order is terminated effective at noon, Wolf & Raven, Tucson, Ariz., for petitioner-appellant.

HUFSTEDLER, Judge (concurring and dissenting):

I concur in the result reached by a majority of the panel under the compulsion of In re Bacon (9th Cir. 1971) 446 F.2d 667; cf. United States v. Gelbard and United States v. Parnas (9th Cir. 1971) 443 F.2d 837. Were the question open in this Circuit, I would hold that 18 U.S.C. 2515 precluded a finding of contempt for reasons stated in the opinions of Judges Adams and Rosenn in In re Joques Egan (3d Cir. 1971) (en banc) (No. 71-1088, May 28, 1971) and in the opinions of Judges Bazelon and Wright in In re Evans and In re Fishlowitz (D.C. Cir. 1971) (Nos. 71-1499 & 71-1521, July 23, 1971).

I would enlarge the appellant on bail pending the filing of his petition for certiorari.

Bruce R. Thompson, judge of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.