Legal Opinion
United States v. James Earl Matthews
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 21, 2001No. 98-10499PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge BETTY B. FLETCHER; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge O’SCANNLAIN.
ORDER
The opinion filed September 14, 2000 and published at 226 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2000) is amended as follows:
At page 1086 delete the following sentence and citation:
We therefore reverse and remand for resentencing on the record as it now stands. See United States v. Hudson, 129 F.3d 994, 995 (8th Cir.1997).
Replace the deleted sentence and citation with the following:
We therefore hold that the government in this case failed to meet its burden of proving that Matthews qualifies as an armed career…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- United States v. Hector Francisco MolinaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- United States v. John E. Kenny, Trenton P. Oelberg, and William L. Parker, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- United States v. James Earl MatthewsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Albert Cunningham v. Robert WongCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Commonwealth v. MullinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- United States v. Del Toro-BarbozaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- United States v. Atul BhagatCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.