![United States v. Demarco](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![United States v. Demarco](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
United States v. Demarco
C09.40452; 550 F.2d 1224 (1977)
-
- USD 0.99
-
- USD 0.99
Descripción editorial
Opinion HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judge: The Government appeals, under 18 U.S.C. § 3731, from the dismissal of an indictment against DeMarco. The district court gave two reasons for dismissing the indictment: (1) The challenged indictment was the culmination of governmental efforts designed to discourage or to prevent DeMarco from asserting his statutory venue rights, and failure to dismiss the indictment would permit the ""potential for vindictiveness"" proscribed in Blackledge v. Perry (1974) 417 U.S. 21, 28, 94 S. Ct. 2098, 40 L. Ed. 2d 628; and (2) the failure of the prosecutor to inform the grand jury about the facts leading the prosecutor to seek the California indictment interfered with the deliberative function of the grand jury.1 Because we agree with the district court's application of Blackledge, we do not reach the second ground for the district court's decision.