Legal Opinion
United States v. Rosenthal
District Court, N.D. California
Decided May 16, 2003No. CR 02-00053 CRBPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
BREYER, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
On January 31, 2003, a jury convicted defendant Edward Rosenthal of violating the federal Controlled Substances Act. The jury found that Rosenthal had manufactured and conspired to manufacture marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846, and had maintained a place for the manufacture of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856. The charges arose out of Rosenthal’s operation of an indoor marijuana-growing facility in Oakland, California. Now pending before the Court is Rosenthal’s motion for a new trial.…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Wainwright v. WittSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Taylor v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. LanierSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Dunn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Rushen v. SpainSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- United States v. Noah KleinmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- United States v. Edward Rosenthal, United States of America v. Edward RosenthalCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Olympic Forest Coalition v. Coast Seafoods CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Charles LynchCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- United States v. RosenthalCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.