Legal Opinion
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernesto Manuel FONSECA-CARO, Defendant-Appellant
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 5, 1997No. 95-16649PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
Ernesto Manuel Fonseca-Caro appeals the denial of his second motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We affirm. 1
Fonseca-Caro was found guilty under a Pinkerton instruction of violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) based solely upon the use and carrying of a gun by a eo-eonspirator. Under Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 647-48, 66 S.Ct. 1180, 1184, 90 L.Ed. 1489 (1946), a co-conspirator is vicariously hable for reasonably foreseeable substantive crimes committed by a co-conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy. Fonseca-Caro argues that since Bailey v. United States held “use”…
3Cases cited12 opinions
- Bailey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Pinkerton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- United States v. Dwayne A. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
- United States v. Charles Lee Douglass and James Andrew BabbCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- United States v. CastanedaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by39 opinions
- United States v. Paul Frederick LaneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- United States v. Michael A. RileyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Edward E. AllenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Commonwealth v. ChambersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- United States v. Julio Cesar Ruiz, United States of America v. Angel Eliazar Noriega-ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.