Legal Opinion

United States v. Qing Chang Jiang, AKA Frank Jiang

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 25, 2007No. 05-10671PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

The panel opinion filed on January 10, 2007, at slip op. 203, is amended as follows:

On slip Opinion page 212, line 26, add the word “intentionally” after “Jiang”. On slip Opinion page 212, line 27, delete the word “materially”.

On slip Opinion page 213, replace lines 1 through 11 (beginning with the sentence, “While the export”) with:

“While the export application had not been cancelled, the government necessarily already knew the status of the application, and any reasonable person in Jiang’s position would have assumed as much. This casts doubt on the conclusion that Jiang intended to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Javid NaghaniCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  2. United States v. Bernard J. AtkinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  3. United States v. James M. CullitonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. United States v. Demond Jamal CamperCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  5. United States v. Oscar D. SainzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. United States v. Jdt, Juvenile MaleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  2. United States v. AtaligCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  3. United States v. Azam DoostCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2021
  4. Lee v. Li CA6California Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. United States v. AtaligCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API