Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Juan Castro, 16-50074 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 16-50074 Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 01, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 01 2017 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50074 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01793-LAB-1 v. JUAN MANUEL CASTRO, ORDER Defendant-Appellant. Before: REINHARDT, KOZINSKI, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. The memorandum disposition, filed on August 22, 2017, is amended as follows: On page 2, lines 15–16, the phrase “because there was sufficient evidence of the chain of custody without these
More
FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 01 2017 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50074 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01793-LAB-1 v. JUAN MANUEL CASTRO, ORDER Defendant-Appellant. Before: REINHARDT, KOZINSKI, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. The memorandum disposition, filed on August 22, 2017, is amended as follows: On page 2, lines 15–16, the phrase “because there was sufficient evidence of the chain of custody without these documents” is deleted. With the foregoing amendment, Appellant’s petition for panel rehearing, filed October 5, 2017, is DENIED. The panel votes to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for rehearing en banc, filed the same date, is DENIED. No future petitions shall be entertained.
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer