Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Bennett Gordon Iler, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 433 F.2d 8
Oct. 19, 1970
William Bryan Osborne, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.
Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Before HAMLEY, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant has applied to this court for bail pending appeal. Prior to his conviction on two counts charging violations of 18 U.S.C. 152 (transfer of assets in contemplation of bankruptcy), appellant was at liberty on his personal recognizance.
The district court denied bail pending appeal on the ground that it would be inconsistent with the obtaining of a study on appellant pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4208(b) and (c).
A defendant may not be denied release from custody pending appeal because of the district court's desire to obtain a report under that statute. See Corey v. United States, 375 U.S. 169, 173, 84 S.Ct. 298, 11 L.Ed.2d 229 (1963). The United States does not oppose release of appellant pending appeal and, in fact, has called our attention to the Corey decision.
This matter is remanded to the district court for entry of an order releasing appellant upon his own recognizance, subject to such reasonable conditions as the district court may require. The present stay of the commitment of appellant shall remain in effect until appellant has been so released from custody.