Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Hickey

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 2, 2009No. 05-10004, 06-10206Published

1Concurrence

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge, specially

concurring:

I reluctantly concur in Judge McKeown’s opinion. I recognize that, under the precedent cited in the opinion, both in and out-of-circuit, “superseding” has been given a meaning in the context of a criminal indictment that is the direct opposite of its meaning in every other known context.1 This is, unfortunately, not the first occasion on which we have construed words in this manner. If “slight” may be equated with “substantial” and “another state” may include the “same state,” see United States v. Saavedra-Velazquez, No. 08-10078, 578 F.3d 1103,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hans v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Alden v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  3. United States v. Pablo Fernandez-Antonia, AKA "Pablo Fernandez"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
  4. United States v. Saavedra-VelazquezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  5. United States v. Maquel Sarbia, AKA Jesus VizcarraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004

1 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