United States v. Patrick Bacon

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Patrick Bacon

974 F.3d 959

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 4, 2020

Docket18-50120

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 974 F.3d 959 (United States v. Patrick Bacon) 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. Patrick Bacon, 974 F.3d 959 (9th Cir. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 4 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-50115

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 5:17-cr-00159-PA-2 Central District of California, v. Riverside

DANIEL RAY, AKA Popeye, AKA Daniel ORDER T. Ray, AKA Daniel Thomas Ray,

Defendant-Appellant.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-50120

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 5:17-cr-00159-PA-1

v.

PATRICK JOHN BACON,

. THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that

United States v. Bacon, No. 18-50120, be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule

of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion

is vacated. The memorandum disposition is vacated with respect to United States v. Bacon, No. 18-50120. The mandate remains in effect with respect to United

States v. Ray, No. 18-50115.

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