U.S. v. Castagana, No. 08-50057 (5-14-10)(Canby joined by Wardlaw and Callahan). The defendant sent letters to politicians and celebrities that were threatening and contain a white powdery substance. The jury convicted on 18 U.S.C. 1038(a)(1) (threats). On appeal, defendant argued that he should have gotten an instruction that required the defendant to specifically intend the recipients to believe that the letters contained anthrax. His argument was that he did not so intend, but to him it was like a gimmick or political speech to indicate that liberals had become "toxic." The 9th rejected the argument, holding that the statute's use of "intent" went to intending to convey false or misleading information; it did not extend to the subjective belief of the defendant of what the recipient may have reasonably believed. This is an objective standard.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Case Summaries and Commentary by Federal Defenders of the Ninth Circuit
Contributors
Click here for Supreme Court & Other Circuit Blogs
Click here for Steve Sady's Blog Summary
Previous Posts
- Dawn Eagle v. Yerington Paiute tribe, No. 08-16786...
- Case o' The Week: Ninth Takes Pot-Shot at Marijuan...
- Collins v. Runnels, No. 08-17299 (5-5-10) (Hug wit...
- U.S. vs. Struckman, No. 08-30463 (5-4-10) (Berzon ...
- U.S. v. Coronado, No. 09-50154 (5-3-10) (Schroeder...
- Case o' The Week: Promises, promises - Franklin, ...
- U.S. v. Franklin, No. 09-30041 (4-29-10) (Clifton ...
- U.S. v. Lee, No. 09-10126 (4-28-10) (D. Nelson wit...
- Case o' The Week: Aptly-named Strickland Case Sets...
- Case o' The Week: A "Glock"-en-schpeal - Alderman ...
Free Publications
D-Web Law BlogsDefense Newsletter
U.S. Supreme Court Case Summaries
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home