United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Daniel Raymond Schwartzenberger, Defendant-appellant, 457 F.2d 380 (9th Cir. 1972)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 457 F.2d 380 (9th Cir. 1972) Feb. 25, 1972

Howard M. Belove, San Francisco, Cal., (argued), Berkeley, Cal., for defendant-appellant.

Douglas McBroom, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Stan Pitkin, U. S. Atty., Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before MERRILL, BROWNING and ELY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:


Appellant, convicted of bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) 2 and 3, challenges the District Court's denial of change of venue sought by him on the ground of pretrial publicity. His challenge on due process grounds must be rejected under the standards set forth in Gawne v. United States, 409 F.2d 1399 (9th Cir. 1969). The publicity complained of was routine, factual, unemotional and wholly lacking in inflammatory content and an adequate voir dire sufficed to avoid possibility of prejudice. His challenge under Rule 21(a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, must be rejected for lack of showing of abuse of discretion. Ignacio v. People of the Territory of Guam, 413 F.2d 513 (9th Cir. 1969).

Appellant argues that improper pretrial confrontation vitiated witness identification at trial. Assuming this to be error (as with other error asserted), we conclude it to be harmless beyond reasonable doubt. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S. Ct. 824, 17 L. Ed. 2d 705 (1967). The police apprehended appellant with the stolen bank funds on his person. At trial he admitted commission of the crime.

Affirmed.

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.