1.     US v. Phillips, No. 18-50138 (7-11-19)(Owens w/Wardlaw & Bybee). This is an appeal from a jury conviction for conspiracy to use interstate telephone calls in the commission of a murder for hire violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1958.  The issue is whether a promise to forgive an uncollectible debt satisfies the pecuniary value requirement for the conviction. It does.

The decision is here:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/07/11/18-50138.pdf

2.      US v. Perez, No. 17-10216 (7-11-19)(Ikuta w/Siler & Paez). The defendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal of his sentence, the 9^th concludes that battery resulting in serious bodily injury, Calif. Penal Code 243(d), qualifies as a “crime of violence”  as defined in USSG 4B1.2(a)(1).  Thus, the sentence and the offense level were affirmed.  In so holding, the 9^th distinguishes battery, 242, from battery resulting in serious bodily injury, 243,  and finds that that the latter requires a deliberate infliction of severe injury.

The decision is here:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/07/11/17-10216.pdf