Legal Opinion
United States v. David Mark
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 31, 2015No. 13-10579PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge FRIEDLAND; Concurrence by Judge McKEOWN.
OPINION
FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judge:
When the government promises not to prosecute a witness in exchange for his cooperation, it cannot then indict the witness unless it proves that he failed to cooperate. Because the government did not do so here, we remand with instructions to dismiss the indictment.
I
From 2006 to 2007, Defendant David Mark and his then-girlfriend Kimberly Brown were employed by Distinctive Real Estate and Investments, a company run by Eve Mazzarella in Las Vegas. During Mark’s tenure, the FBI began investigating…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. Juventino CarrilloCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- United States v. Eric R. Meyer and Gordon O. Hoff, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Jean Edward PackwoodCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. CastanedaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. HinksonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Armin Azod et al v. James G. Robinson et al.District Court, C.D. California · 2026
- Armin Azod et al v. James G. Robinson et al.District Court, C.D. California · 2026
- Carl Schwartz v. Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- DJCBP Corporation et al. v. City of Baldwin Park et al.District Court, C.D. California · 2025
- Mendoza v. City of Peoria Ex Rel. Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.