Legal Opinion

United States v. Nicholas Middleton

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided November 16, 2000No. 99-10518PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRABER, Circuit Judge:

Defendant Nicholas Middleton challenges his conviction for intentionally causing damage to a “protected computer” without authorization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5)(A). Defendant asks us to interpret the statute, which prohibits conduct causing damage to “one or more individuals,” 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(8)(A), to exclude damage to a corporation. Defendant also argues that the trial court incorrectly instructed the jury on the “damage” element of the offense and that the government presented insufficient evidence of the requisite amount of damage. We disagree with…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Clinton v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. United States v. FregaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. United States v. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
  2. United States v. Perry, AntoineCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2007
  3. Nexans Wires S.A. v. Sark-USA, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2004
  4. United States v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  5. Mohamad v. RajoubCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2011

43 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