Legal Opinion
United States v. Mateo Estrada
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 14, 2006No. 05-10500PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWARZER, Senior District Judge:
Defendant-appellant Mateo Estrada appeals his conviction, after jury trial, of possessing pseudoephedrine knowing, or with reasonable cause to believe, that it would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2). We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Responding to a report of an accident, a California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer found an overturned pickup truck with a camper shell on a remote, hilly road in Colusa County. The truck contained 178 pounds of pseudoephedrine pills, as well as 78 gallons of denatured alcohol, a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- California v. TrombettaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Arizona v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Liparota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Robert HERNANDEZ, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- United States v. Vito Spillone, United States of America v. John Clyde Abel, United States of America v. Frank CitroCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Jeffrey Moldowan v. Maureen FournierCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Olszewski v. SpencerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2006
- United States v. Cesar UbaldoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Jeffrey Moldowan v. Maureen FournierCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Richter v. HickmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.