Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Janet Goldstein,
  • U.S.
  • , Los Angeles,
  • , for U.S. Ryan D. McCortney, Noel M. Ragsdale, Los Angeles,
  • , for
Judges
  • Alfred Theodore Goodwin
  • John Clifford Wallace
  • Joseph Tyree Sneed
  • J. Blaine Anderson
  • Procter Ralph Hug
  • Thomas Tang
  • Otto Richard Skopil
  • Mary Murphy Schroeder
  • Betty Binns Fletcher
  • Joseph Jerome Farris
  • Harry Pregerson
  • Arthur Lawrence Alarcon
  • Cecil F. Poole
  • Warren John Ferguson
  • Dorothy Wright Nelson
  • William Cameron Canby
  • Robert Boochever
  • William Albert Norris
  • Stephen Roy Reinhardt
  • Robert R. Beezer
  • Cynthia Holcomb Hall
  • Charles Edward Wiggins
  • Melvin T. Brunetti
  • Alex Kozinski
  • John T. Noonan
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Janet Goldstein,
  • U.S.
  • , Los Angeles,
  • , for U.S. Ryan D. McCortney, Noel M. Ragsdale, Los Angeles,
  • , for
Judges
  • Alfred Theodore Goodwin
  • John Clifford Wallace
  • Joseph Tyree Sneed
  • J. Blaine Anderson
  • Procter Ralph Hug
  • Thomas Tang
  • Otto Richard Skopil
  • Mary Murphy Schroeder
  • Betty Binns Fletcher
  • Joseph Jerome Farris
  • Harry Pregerson
  • Arthur Lawrence Alarcon
  • Cecil F. Poole
  • Warren John Ferguson
  • Dorothy Wright Nelson
  • William Cameron Canby
  • Robert Boochever
  • William Albert Norris
  • Stephen Roy Reinhardt
  • Robert R. Beezer
  • Cynthia Holcomb Hall
  • Charles Edward Wiggins
  • Melvin T. Brunetti
  • Alex Kozinski
  • John T. Noonan
See more information ...
Smart Summary

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE, v. CONKLIN WALLACE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

ORDER

Upon the vote of a majority of the regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Rule 25 of the Rules of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The previous three-judges panel assignment is withdrawn.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

UNITED STATES v. WALLACE
(Feb 26, 1986)