Legal Opinion
United States v. Armstrong
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 2, 1995No. Nos. 93-50031, 93-50057PublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge REINHARDT;. Concurrence by Judge WALLACE; Dissent by Judge RYMER.
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
We review this ease en banc to resolve a conflict in our circuit over the proper standard for determining whether an adequate showing has been made by a defendant seeking discovery in connection with a selective prosecution charge. The conflict arises from two cases filed within days of each other that adopted different approaches to this question. United States v. Redondo-Lemos, 955 F.2d 1296, 1302 (9th Cir.1992), held that the government could be ordered to provide discovery only upon…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. Winston Bryant McConneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Wayte v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- United States v. Kenneth Joseph HillCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Alcala v. WoodfordCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- State v. KeeneOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. RenoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Anthony L. Olvis, A/K/A Tony Angela D. PalmerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.