United States v. Yepiz
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentNguyen, Circuit Judge
While represented by competent retained counsel, Manuel Yepiz sent a pro se letter to the district court. Because the court’s local rules prohibit, among other things, represented parties from communi-*1081eating with the court pro se, his letter was not filed. Instead, the court returned -the letter to Yepiz’s counsel along with notice of the reason for the rejection. Importantly, Yepiz’s letter doesn’t suggest -any dissatisfaction with his attorney’s representation, only with its cost. Yet the majority holds that the court’s failure to consider the letter is structural error requiring automatic…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Wayne Dale Schell v. Larry Witek, Warden Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, State of California, 1Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Christian v. Mattel, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Gary HalbertCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Charles Bland, Jr. v. California Department of Corrections Attorney General of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.