Legal Opinion
United States v. Cervantes
District Court, N.D. California
Decided March 15, 2016No. Case No.: 12-CR-0792 YGRPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
PREtrial Order No. 13 Regarding Rule 404 (b), H. Cervantes’s Motions in Li-mine Nos. 10 and 11, and Larez’s Motion in Limine No. 5
Re: Dkt. Nos. 827, 838, 839
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Pending before the Court is Defendant Henry Cervantes’s (“H. Cervantes”) motion in limine number 10 to exclude noticed Rule 404(b) evidence (Docket No. 888), H. Cervantes’s motion in limine number 11 to exclude specified evidence as not relevant, or as hearsay, or as subject to exclusion under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 (Docket No. 839), and Alberto Larez’s (“Larez”) motion in…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Yates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Salinas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Boyle v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- James Odom v. Microsoft Corporation, a Washington Corporation Best Buy Co., Inc., a Minnesota CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fakhoury v. O'ReillyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2022