United States v. Apel, s. 11–50003

• Decision Date: 14 August 2014
• Docket Number: Nos. 11–50003,11–50004,11–50005.,s. 11–50003
• Citation: 763 F.3d 1088
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. John Dennis APEL, Defendant–Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. John Dennis Apel, Defendant–Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. John Dennis Apel, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

763 F.3d 1088

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.John Dennis APEL, Defendant–Appellant.

United States of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.John Dennis Apel, Defendant–Appellant.

United States of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.John Dennis Apel, Defendant–Appellant.

Nos. 11–50003, 11–50004, 11–50005.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 14, 2014.

Erwin Chemerinsky, Selwyn Chu (argued) and Matthew Plunkett (argued), law students, University of California, Irvine School of Law, for Defendant–Appellant.

André Birotte Jr., United States Attorney, Robert E. Dugdale and Mark R. Yohalem (argued), Assistant United States Attorneys, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff–Appellee.

On Remand from the United States Supreme Court. D.C. Nos. 2:10–cr–00830–JFW–1, 2:10–cr–00869–JFW–1, 2:10–cr–00831–JFW–1.

Before: BARRY G. SILVERMAN and JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge.^*

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

On February 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court vacated our opinion at 676 F.3d 1202 and remanded the case to us for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. United States v. Apel, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 1144, 186 L.Ed.2d 75 (2014).

In light of the Supreme Court's decision, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

* The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.