United States v. Jose Teofilo Solorio, United States of America v. Bourne Bobby Thomas

43 F.3d 1334, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 384, 95 Daily Journal DAR 672, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 729
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Jose Teofilo Solorio, United States of America v. Bourne Bobby Thomas. Read the opinion of the Court — 37 F.3d 454
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided January 17, 1995·No. 93-50507·Published

Opinion

43 F.3d 1334

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jose Teofilo SOLORIO, Defendant-Appellant,
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Bourne Bobby THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 93-50507, 93-50508.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Jan. 17, 1995.

Before: D.W. NELSON, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and KING*, District Judge.ORDER

The motion of Plaintiff-Appellee, filed December 12, 1994, requesting a delay in the publication of the opinion in this case is granted. Publication of the opinion is hereby withheld until further order of this Court.

The motion for an order remanding this case for the limited purpose of determining whether there was prosecutorial misconduct is hereby denied.

*

The Honorable Samuel P. King, United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation

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

United States v. Jose Teofilo Solorio, United States of America v. Bourne Bobby Thomas, 43 F.3d 1334, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 384, 95 Daily Journal DAR 672, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 729 (9th Cir. 1995).

43 F.3d 1334 (United States v. Jose Teofilo Solorio, United States of America v. Bourne Bobby Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Solorio
43 F.3d 1334 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)