Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Cory Eglash

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 17, 2016No. 14-30132Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWallace, Circuit Judge

I concur with regard to the majority’s treatment of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, but I dissent from the majority’s conclusion with regard to Count 6.

I agree with the majority that United States v. Brown, 771 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2014), controls with regard to Count 4. Eglash is correct that the success of his fraudulent scheme did not depend upon receiving the notice of disability award underlying Count 4. That, however, is not the standard for determining whether a mailing was made “for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do” under 18 U.S.C. § 1341. The use of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pereira v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. Schmuck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. United States v. Walter L. Mitchell, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
  4. United States v. George Patrick CharmleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  5. United States v. Robert BrutzmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984

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