Legal Opinion

United States v. Dan Wallen

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided October 25, 2017No. 16-30033PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FISHER, Circuit Judge:

Dan Wallen appeals his conviction after a bench trial for killing three grizzly bears in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Although we reject Wallen’s argument that he was entitled to a jury trial, we hold the magistrate judge, who served as the trier of fact at trial, misconceived the self-defense element of the offense, and that error was not harmless. We hold the “good faith belief’ defense for a prosecution under 16 U.S.C. .§ 1540 is governed by a subjective, rather than an objective, standard, and is satisfied when a defendant actually, even if…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Liteky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Beck v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. Brian CharetteCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  2. Stacy Cole v. Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., et al.District Court, D. Arizona · 2026
  3. United States v. Dan WallenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
  4. United States v. Israel Nava-ArellanoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  5. United States v. Ramirez-OrtizDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2019

1 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