United States v. Raymond Daugavietis
This text of 976 F.2d 738 (United States v. Raymond Daugavietis) 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.
Opinion
976 F.2d 738
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Raymond DAUGAVIETIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 91-30145.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 15, 1992.*
Decided Sept. 17, 1992.
Before EUGENE A. WRIGHT, FLETCHER and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
In light of the district court's express findings regarding the joint nature of the grow operation, it correctly attributed all 140 plants to Daugavietis.
We resolved the constitutional issues Daugavietis raises in United States v. DeLeon, 955 F.2d 1346 (9th Cir.1992), and we are bound to follow our prior decision.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
976 F.2d 738, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 33394, 1992 WL 227059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-raymond-daugavietis-ca9-1992.