United States v. Samuel Orozco-Acosta
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
The opinion in this case filed by this court on May 26, 2010, slip op. 7534, is amended as follows:
At slip op. at 7538, first sentence of the second full paragraph, indicate a footnote following “Because the government concedes that the introduction of the CNR violated Orozco-Acosta’s confrontation right,”. The indicated footnote is to be numbered 3, with following footnotes renumbered accordingly. The new footnote 3 then is to state:
The government was well-advised to make this concession. Although prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in Melendez-Diaz, our case law consistently held…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- United States v. CartyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Miller v. GammieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- State v. JasperWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- United States v. Venancio Rojas-PedrozaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Freddie Owens v. Bryan StirlingCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2020
- United States v. ChungCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. Roberto LopezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.