United States v. Robert Pitner, United States of America v. David M. Hanson

Good Law
23 F.3d 1497·94 Daily Journal DAR 6055·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 9572·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3188
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 4, 199490-10299California210 words

Opinion

Opinion

23 F.3d 1497 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert PITNER, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David M. HANSON, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 90-10299, 90-10318. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. May 4, 1994. J. Frank McCabe, Goorjian & McCabe, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-appellant Robert Pitner. Juliana Drous, Tamburello, Hanlon & Brescianai, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-appellant David Hanson. Eric J. Swenson, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, CA, for plaintiff-appellee. On Remand from the United States Supreme Court. Before: HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges, and BURNS, * Senior District Judge. ORDER Upon consideration of the Supreme Court's decision in Pitner v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 873 , 127 L.Ed.2d 70 (1994), and Hanson v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 873 , 127 L.Ed.2d 70 (1994), we hereby withdraw the opinion, see 979 F.2d 156 (9th Cir.1993), and unpublished memorandum, see Nos. 90-10299, 90-10318 (9th Cir. Nov. 2, 1992), in the above-captioned cases. Further, we reverse and remand the appellants' cases for a new trial consistent with Ratzlaf v. United States, --- U.S.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.