Court Opinion

ID: 9443667
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:26:59.186376+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:33.931372
License: Public Domain

FAHY, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
 I agree with Judge Prettyman’s opinion that appellant was not entitled to a'hearing on- his motion to dismiss the indictment as void because ten members of the jury which indicted him were Government employees and two were wives of Government employees, but that the case should be remanded for a new trial (1) so that the issue whether or not Quinn claimed the privilege by adopting 0 the statement made by Fitzpatrick may be initially decided in the trial court, and (2) for determination whether or n'ot Quinn was aware of the intention of his inquirer that answers were required despite his objections. As the opinion states, the deliberate and intentional character of the refusal is an element of the offense. The necessity for awareness by the witness of the intention of his inquirer to require answers despite the witness’ objections, and the necessity for a deliberate and intentional refusal, are shown by the analysis in Section II of Judge Bazelon’s opinion. The formulation in Section III of his opinion of the issues involved furnishes a practical guide to the trier of the facts.