United States v. Havelock
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Dissent
FISHER, Circuit Judge,
with whom
JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, Circuit Judge, joins, dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. Although I agree with the majority that we may look to the contents of a communication to determine to whom it is addressed, I disagree with the majority that Havelock’s communications were not “addressed to any other person.” 18 U.S.C. § 876(c).
As an initial matter, I have some doubts regarding the majority’s conclusion that § 876(c) applies only to communications addressed to natural persons. Although there is some reason to reach that conclusion, the context in which the phrase…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brown v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- United States v. James TwineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Vanscoter v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. HavelockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010