Legal Opinion

United States v. Randall Muhlenbruch

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided June 28, 2012No. 11-2555PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BEAM, Circuit Judge.

This is defendant Randall Muhlenbruch’s second appeal in this child pornography case. In the first appeal, United States v. Muhlenbruch, 634 F.3d 987 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 228, 181 L.Ed.2d 127 (2011) (Muhlenbruch I), we held that Muhlenbruch’s convictions for both receiving child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2), and possessing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B), violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. Muhlenbruch I, 634 F.3d at 1003-04. Therefore, we reversed and remanded with instructions for the district…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Chapman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Ball v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Pepper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  4. United States v. Mark T. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2006
  5. United States v. Scott RistineCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. United States v. Chet WestCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
  2. United States v. Todd HobbsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2013
  3. United States v. William MeffordCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2013
  4. Diorec v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2013
  5. United States v. Frank BurnsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API