LDF Files Reply Brief for Bobby Seale on Eve of Argument of Contempt Conviction Appeal

    efense lund 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

FEBRUARY 2, 1972 

LDF FILES REPLY BRIEF FOR BOBBY SEALE 

ON EVE OF ARGUMENT OF CONTEMPT CONVICTION APPEAL 

NEW YORK, N.Y. --- On February 2, a reply brief was filed on 

behalf of Black Panther leader Bobby G. Seale by attorneys for the 

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) and Black 

Panther attorney, Charles Garry The original brief in this case 

was filed June 1969. The Legal Defense Fund first announced its in- 

volvement in the case February 18, 1970 after Charles Garry requested 

LDF's assistance. 

Oral argument on behalf of Seale will be presented February 

9, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, by Charles 

Garry and Anthony G. Amsterdam. At issue is the four-year contempt 

sentence imposed on Seale by U.S. District Judge Julius Hoffman 

during the course of proceedings in the Chicago conspiracy trial. 

The purpose of the reply brief is to answer the government's 

brief; and to deal with a number of recent Supreme Court decisions 

that LDF and Garry contend, requires that Seale's conviction be re- 

versed and that charges be dismissed. 

Virtually all of Seale's contempt convictions arose, as his 

reply brief indicates, out of, "the trial court's wrongful denial 

of Seale's right to counsel of choice and to self-representation 

after Seale discovered that his own lawyer, Charles Garry, could not 

be present to represent him. Legal Defense Fund attorneys contend 

that Seale, “was in the end punished with contempt for his attempts 

to explain in the court that he had never authorized anyone but Garry 

(more) 

NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. | 10 Columbus Circle | New York, N.Y. 10019 | (212) 586-8397 

William T. Coleman, Jr. - President Jack Greenberg - Director-Counsel 



BOBBY SEALE REPLY BRIEF PAGE 2 

to act as his lawyer; and in the absence of Garry, he wanted to 

represent himself," Seale's lawyers argue that on this record his 

conduct cannot legitimately be considered contemptuous. 

Seale also argues that his conviction, without benefit of 

notice, hearing, representation by counsel or jury trial, violated 

fundamental procedural safeguards. 

The Fund will raise the following constitutional arguments: 

I. The personal confrontation between Seale 

and Judge Hoffman left the judge with 

potential for bias. 

II. Seale was denied jury trial. 

III. Seale was denied the right to due process 

hearing. 

=30= 

For further information contact: Attorney Elizabeth B. DuBois 
or Abeke Foster, Public Information 

(212) 586-8397 

NOTE: Please bear in mind that the LDF is a completely separate 

and distinct organization even though we were established by the 

NAACP and those initials are retained in our name. Our correct 

designation is NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., 

frequently shortened to LDF.