Opinion · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

District of Columbia v. Moody

D.C. v. Moody, 304 F.2d 943 (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1962)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1962-06-21
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. We have before us the question, certified to us by a judge of the Municipal Court of the District of Columbia,1 whether the offense of destroying private property, in violation of D.C.Code § 22-3112 (1961), should be prosecuted by the Corporation Counsel of the District of Columbia or by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Inasmuch as violations of Section 22-3112 are, to quote the section as amended, presently punishable by “fine not to exceed one hundred dollars, or imprisonment not to exceed six months, or both such fine and imprisonment” (emphasis supplied), we think that by reason of D. C.Code § 23-101 prosecutions under Section 22-3112 must be conducted by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. See United States v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed District of Columbia v. Moody. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. MOODY,304 F.2d 943(D.C. Cir. 1962)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. Ione MOODY. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. Walter HILL
and Franklin W. Hamilton.
Nos. 16827, 16828.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued May 4, 1962.
Decided June 21, 1962.
Mr. Hubert B. Pair, Asst. Corp. Counsel for the District of Columbia, with whom Messrs. Chester H. Gray, Corp. Counsel, and Milton D. Korman, Principal Asst. Corp. Counsel, were on the brief, submitted on the brief for District of Columbia.

No appearance was entered for defendants.
Before WASHINGTON, DANAHER and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
We have before us the question, certified to us by a judge of the Municipal Court of the District of Columbia,1whether the offense of destroying private property, in violation of D.C. Code § 22-3112 (1961), should be prosecuted by the Corporation Counsel of the District of Columbia or by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Inasmuch as violations of Section 22-3112 are, to quote the section as amended, presently punishable by "fine not to exceed one hundred dollars, or imprisonment not to exceed six months, orbothsuch fine and imprisonment" (emphasis supplied), we think that by reason of D.C. Code §23-101prosecutions under Section 22-3112 must be conducted by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. See United States v. Strothers, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 63,228 F.2d 34(1955).

So ordered.Page 944
  1. Pursuant to D.C. Code §23-102(1961). ↩