Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Havelock

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 6, 2012No. 08-10472Published

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

  1. Brown v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. United States v. James TwineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  4. Vanscoter v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  5. United States v. HavelockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API