Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
United States v. Terry Christensen
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 8, 2016No. 08-50531; 08-50570; 09-50115; 09-50125; 09-50128; 09-50159; 10-50434; 10-50462; 10-50464; 10-50472Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partChristensen, Chief District Judge
Although I concur in most of the majority opinion, I dissent from the portion of the majority opinion affirming the dismissal of Juror 7 in the second trial involving defendants Christensen and Pellicano. Majority op. at 806-15. The district court *825erred by dismissing Juror 7 based on a determination that Juror 7 was not credible and had lied to the court on an unrelated issue concerning his views on federal tax laws.
Shortly after one hour of deliberations following a 21-day trial, the district court received a confusing note in the handwriting of at least two, and perhaps three of the jurors,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Juan A. Merced v. Joseph L. McGrath Warden, Pelican Bay PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Hagop VartanianCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Alfred R. Dyer v. Arthur Calderon, Warden, of California State Prison at San QuentinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. John Fife Symington, Iii, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.