United States v. McDonald Hicks, Eli Davis, Jr.

657 F.2d 244, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 17955
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. McDonald Hicks, Eli Davis, Jr.. Read the opinion of the Court — 625 F.2d 216
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 8, 1981·No. 78-2534·Published

Opinions

ORDER

Before WALLACE and TANG, Circuit Judges, and WHELAN,* District Judge.

The Supreme Court has vacated and remanded our initial disposition of this case, 625 F.2d 216 (9th Cir. 1980), vacated, [245]*245U.S. —, 101 S.Ct. 1752, 68 L.Ed.2d 233 (1981), in light of its decision in Michael M. v. Superior Court, 450 U.S. 464, 101 S.Ct. 1200, 67 L.Ed.2d 437 (1981). Since then, another panel of this court has held that 18 U.S.C. § 2032, the statute involved in the case before us, does not deny equal protection of the law. United States v. Sangrey, 648 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1981). Therefore, we reverse the dismissal of the indictment against Hicks and Davis, and remand for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

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

United States v. McDonald Hicks, Eli Davis, Jr., 657 F.2d 244, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 17955 (9th Cir. 1981).

657 F.2d 244 (United States v. McDonald Hicks, Eli Davis, Jr.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County
450 U.S. 464 (Supreme Court, 1981)
United States v. McDonald Hicks, Eli Davis, Jr.
625 F.2d 216 (Ninth Circuit, 1980)
United States v. Dennis Sangrey
648 F.2d 597 (Ninth Circuit, 1981)