US v. Eglash, No. 14-30132
(2-17-16)(Christen; concurrence by Kleinfeld; partial dissent by Wallace). This
concerns the final step necessary to complete a fraud under Schmuck and US v. Brown, 771 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir 2014). The 9th held that getting a
"notice" from the SSA about an award was a necessary final step. However, a "summary" of statements
was not. The 9th reversed the former
conviction and affirmed the latter.
Kleinfeld thinks Brown was
wrongly decided and should go en banc.
Wallace sees no problem.
The decision is here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/02/17/14-30132.pdf
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home