United States v. William Richard Minor

Ninth Circuit

United States v. William Richard Minor

783 F.2d 154, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22294, 1986 Copyright L. Dec. (CCH) 25,986

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 18, 1986

Docket83-5152

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 783 F.2d 154 (United States v. William Richard Minor) 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. William Richard Minor, 783 F.2d 154, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22294, 1986 Copyright L. Dec. (CCH) 25,986 (9th Cir. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Minor was convicted of violations of 17 U.S.C. § 506(a), 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and 18 U.S.C. § 371. We affirmed, United States v. Minor, 756 F.2d 731 (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam), but stayed the mandate pending disposition by the Supreme Court of Dowling v. United States, 84-589, involving Minor’s co-defendant, Paul Dowling. The Court reversed Dowling’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2314, holding the statute does not apply to the interstate transportation of “bootleg” phonorecords manufactured *155 and distributed without the consent of the copyright owners. Dowling v. United States, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 3127, 87 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985). The Court then granted certiorari in this case, vacated our judgment, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Dowling, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 401, 88 L.Ed.2d 353 (1985). On the basis of Dowling, we reverse Minor’s conviction for violation of § 2314 (counts 8 and 9). We affirm his conviction on the remaining counts for the reasons stated in our original opinion.

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

ORDER

Minor was convicted of violations of 17 U.S.C. § 506(a), 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and 18 U.S.C. § 371. We affirmed, United States v. Minor, 756 F.2d 731 (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam), but stayed the mandate pending disposition by the Supreme Court of Dowling v. United States, 84-589, involving Minor’s co-defendant, Paul Dowling. The Court reversed Dowling’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2314, holding the statute does not apply to the interstate transportation of “bootleg” phonorecords manufactured *155 and distributed without the consent of the copyright owners. Dowling v. United States, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 3127, 87 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985). The Court then granted certiorari in this case, vacated our judgment, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Dowling, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 401, 88 L.Ed.2d 353 (1985). On the basis of Dowling, we reverse Minor’s conviction for violation of § 2314 (counts 8 and 9). We affirm his conviction on the remaining counts for the reasons stated in our original opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

783 F.2d 154, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22294, 1986 Copyright L. Dec. (CCH) 25,986, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-william-richard-minor-ca9-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack