Lambright v. Ryan, No. 10-99012 (10-17-12) (Reinhardt with Schroeder; dissent by Callahan).

Note: This is an Az FPD CHU case.

The 9th faces an appeal concerning what is, and what is not, privileged under a protective order issued by the district court as a result of an IAC hearing, and then remand for resentencing. Yes, it is very technical, and concerns what information, given as to IAC and relating to attorney-client conversations and the privilege against self incrimination, is now protected under the order and unavailable to the Pima County prosecutors in the resentencing. The 9th holds that the district court abused its discretion in holding that its protective order only applied to privileged materials produced after the issuance, the materials produced at the hearing were not covered because of a failure to move for sealing, and that the petitioner failed to justify the privilege. The matter is remanded to allow the petitioner to assert his privilege. Dissenting, Callahan would find that the district did not abuse its discretion, and that the petitioner failed to adequately assert the privilege and that the privilege itself.

Congratulations to AFPD Jennifer Garcia and R&W Keith Hilzedenger of the CHU of the FPD Az.

U.S. v. Peppers, No. 11-30322 (10-17-12) (per curiam with Black, Graber and Rawlinson).

The defendant appeals from his conviction for assault on a federal officer, arguing that the court erred in combining model jury instructions of assault on a federal officer with self defense.  The 9th found no error, as the combined instruction stated the elements, self defense, and placed the burden on the government to prove all elements.