United States of America, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Harold Wayne Lindsey, Appellant, 436 F.2d 1385 (9th Cir. 1971)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; William T. Beeks, Judge.
Irwin Trester, South Pasadena, Cal., for appellant.
Stan Pitkin, U. S. Atty., Jerald E. Olson, Asst. U. S. Atty., Seattle, Wash., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS and MERRILL, Circuit Judges, and TAYLOR, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of conviction is affirmed in this bank robbery case.
A Miranda point is made (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694). The facts here fall within our United States v. Hilliker, 9 Cir., 436 F.2d 101, decided December 11, 1970.
We find the assertion of inadequate representation to be without substance. It appears to have been quite competent, and the objections now are those of second guessing.
The length of the sentence is attacked and it is asserted there was obvious prejudice of the court. We cannot accept the validity of the assertion and we cannot review sentence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
