Wednesday, December 23, 2015

United States v. DeCinces, No. 15-50033 (12-22-15)(Rawlinson, Graber, and concurrence by Watford).

The 9th reverses a district court's ruling precluding 404(b) evidence in an insider trading case.  The 'other acts" could show plan, knowledge, intent or lack of mistake.  The 9th had jurisdiction as it was a pretrial order that precluded evidence. Defendant's cross appeal on collateral issues related to the ruling was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.  The 9th found the issues distinct.  Watford concurs, noting that the double jeopardy clause is not applicable here for the issues raised as to failure to state a claim.

The decision is here:

Garcia v. Long, No. 13-57071 (12-21-15) (Bybee with Fisher and Foote, D.J.) 

The 9th affirms the district court's granting of habeas relief, even under AEDPA's deference, for a Miranda violation.  When the petitioner, asked by law enforcement, if he wanted to speak, said "no," it was plain and simple: no.  There was no ambiguity or need to clarify.  "no" means "no."

The decision is here:


Post a Comment

<< Home