Legal Opinion

United States v. William James Bichsel

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 13, 2005No. 04-30126PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, Circuit Judge:

Because the indoor posting of applicable federal regulations was inconspicuous to visitors outside the United States courthouse in Tacoma (“the courthouse”), we must reach an issue of first impression: whether actual notice is sufficient to meet the conspicuous posting requirement of 40 U.S.C. § 1315 for the enforcement of 41 C.F.R. § 102-74.385, failure to comply with the lawful order of a federal police officer. 1 We hold that actual notice is fair and adequate notice, and affirm Father William Bichsel’s (“Father Bichsel”) conviction under the regulation.

I…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. James Cabaccang, United States of America v. Richard T. Cabaccang, United States of America v. Roy Toves CabaccangCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. United States v. CassiagnolCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1970
  3. United States v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
  4. United States v. Ralph M. CrowCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
  5. United States v. Joseph StrakoffCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. United States v. StrongCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2013
  2. Roshchin v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2014
  3. Trunk v. City of San DiegoDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2008
  4. United States v. Rojas-OsorioDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
  5. United States v. DengDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2008

8 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