United States v. Omar Argueta-Rosales
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBybee, Circuit Judge
I agree with the majority that the specific-intent standard that governs Argue-ta-Rosales’s case is supplied by United States v. Lombera-Valdovinos, 429 F.3d 927, 928-30 (9th Cir.2005). Because'the district court failed to apply that standard, and because we are bound by Lomberar-Valdovinos, I concur in the majority’s judgment vacating the conviction and remanding this case for retrial. Maj. Op. at 1158.
In all other respects, however, I dissent. I am convinced that Lomberar-Valdovinos was wrongly decided and that our understanding of when an alien is “free from official restraint” has reached…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Kaplan v. TodSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- United States v. AguilarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States of America,plaintiff-Appellee v. Alejandro Pacheco-MedinaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Juan Gonzalez-TorresCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Gerardo Parga-RosasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.