United States v. Amado Martinez-Fuerte, United States of America v. Jose Jiminez-Garcia, United States of America v. Raymond Rangel Guillen and Fernando Medrano-Barragan

538 F.2d 858
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 20, 1976
Docket74-2462
StatusPublished

This text of 538 F.2d 858 (United States v. Amado Martinez-Fuerte, United States of America v. Jose Jiminez-Garcia, United States of America v. Raymond Rangel Guillen and Fernando Medrano-Barragan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Amado Martinez-Fuerte, United States of America v. Jose Jiminez-Garcia, United States of America v. Raymond Rangel Guillen and Fernando Medrano-Barragan, 538 F.2d 858 (9th Cir. 1976).

Opinion

538 F.2d 858

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Amado MARTINEZ-FUERTE, Defendant-Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Jose JIMINEZ-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellee.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Raymond RANGEL GUILLEN and Fernando Medrano-Barragan,
Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 74-2462, 74-2680, 74-2714.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

July 20, 1976.

Jack Robinson, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), San Diego, Cal., for the U. S.

Charles M. Sevilla (argued), of Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, Cal., for appellant Martinez-Fuerte.

Frank M. Mangan (argued), of Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, Cal., for appellee Jiminez-Garcia.

Michael J. McCabe of Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., and E. J. Boone, San Diego, Cal., for appellees Rangel Guillen and Medrano-Barragan.

ORDER

Before DUNIWAY and CARTER, Circuit Judges, and WEIGEL, District Judge.

Pursuant to the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte et al., 1976, --- U.S. ----, 96 S.Ct. 3074, 48 L.Ed.2d ---, it is ordered:

1. In No. 74-2462, the conviction of the appellant Martinez-Fuerte is affirmed.

2. In No. 74-2680, the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

3. In No. 74-2714, the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
428 U.S. 543 (Supreme Court, 1976)
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
538 F.2d 858 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
538 F.2d 858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-amado-martinez-fuerte-united-states-of-america-v-jose-ca9-1976.