U.S. v. Vallejo
| Decision Date | 23 April 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-50762,99-50762 |
| Parties | (9th Cir. 2001) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GUILLERMO VALLEJO, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Todd W. Burns, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, California, for the defendant-appellant.
John N. Parmley, United States Attorney, San Diego, California, for the appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Rudi M. Brewster, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-99-0808-RMB.
Before: Fletcher, Thomas, and Wardlaw, Circuit Judges.
The opinion filed January 16, 2001, appearing at 237 F.3d 1008, is amended as follows:
1. On slip opinion page 657, delete footnote 1.
2. Add the following in a footnote (new footnote # 3) after the first sentence of Paragraph 8 in Part III.A.1 on slip opinion page 662:
This case does not involve the Government's use of "unknowing courier" testimony, in which a law enforcement official testifies that certain drug traffickers do not entrust large quantities of drugs to unknowing transporters. Therefore, we do not address the admissibility of such testimony.
With this amendment, the panel has voted to deny Appel-lee's petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.
The full court has been advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Munoz v. PHH Mortg. Corp., No. 1:08-cv-00759-DAD-BAM
... ... Vallejo , 237 F.3d 1008, 1019 (9th Cir. 2001) ("To be admissible, expert testimony must ... address an issue beyond the common knowledge of the average ... were the lead dogs in offering compelling economics to us," suggesting that having a CRA with Atrium took precedence over the actual terms offered by the MIs. ( Id. ) After the mortgage insurance industry ... ...
- State Of Conn. v. Hedge.
- United States v. Ellison
-
Miller v. Stovall
... ... 65, 160 L.Ed.2d 29 (2004) (district court did not ignore Supreme Court authority in holding State waived harmless error); United States v. Vallejo, 237 F.3d 1008, 1026 (9th Cir.2001), reprinted as amended, 246 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir.2001) ("The Government does not argue that this error was ... ...
-
Experts & investigators
...was said during interrogation differs from agent’s version). [ United States v. Vallejo , 237 F.23d 1008 (9th Cir. 2000), as amended, 246 F.3d 1150 (2001).] §6:76 Bite Mark Identification Experts There has been some success in excluding such prosecution evidence of expert analysis of bite m......