United States v. Ference Lang
157 F.3d 1161, 1998 WL 598695
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 11, 1998·No. 96-10464·Published·Cited by 7 cases
Opinion
ORDER
The opinion in this case, filed on July 21, 1998 [149 F.3d 1044], is amended as follows:
*1162 On page 7818, in the second full paragraph, the first two sentences [149 F.3d at 1046](“Lang subsequently brought ... suppressed Lang’s statements.”) are deleted and the following is inserted in their place:
Lang subsequently brought a pretrial motion to suppress his statements and the narcotics on the ground that they were obtained in violation of his constitutional rights, as they were the product of coercion. The district court conducted an evi-dentiary hearing and held that the agent did coerce the statements and suppressed them.
On page 7820, in the third full paragraph, the second sentence [149 F.3d at 1047](“There is no dispute ... Miranda rights.”) is deleted and the following is inserted in its place:
There is no dispute that Lang, upon being arrested, was coerced into making incriminating statements.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. Ference Lang, 157 F.3d 1161, 1998 WL 598695 (9th Cir. 1998).
157 F.3d 1161 (United States v. Ference Lang) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
United States v. Ditto
Ninth Circuit, 2026
People of Guam v. Joseph Quichocho Taimanglo II (aka Joseph Quichocho Taimanglo; aka Baby Joe; aka Joseph Quintanilla Taimanglo II)
2025 Guam 7 (Supreme Court of Guam, 2025)
United States v. Aaron Holmes, Jr.
121 F.4th 727 (Ninth Circuit, 2024)
United States v. John Harris
Ninth Circuit, 2018
Aspen Skiing Co. v. Cherrett (In Re Cherrett)
873 F.3d 1060 (Ninth Circuit, 2017)
Robert Ito Farm, Inc. v. County of Maui
842 F.3d 681 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Lustig
3 F. Supp. 3d 808 (S.D. California, 2014)