UNITED STATES v. SOTO (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andres SOTO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-50296

Decided: May 08, 2019

Before: WARDLAW and BEA, Circuit Judges, and MURPHY,* District Judge.

Janaki Gandhi, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Zachary Howe, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Eric Fish, Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

ORDER

The memorandum disposition filed on February 21, 2019 is amended as follows:

On page three of the memorandum disposition, in the paragraph beginning “3. Because Soto was not subject to custodial interrogation,” replace with .

With this amendment, Judges Wardlaw and Bea vote to deny the appellant’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, and Judge Murphy so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc is therefore DENIED. No further petitions for panel or en banc rehearing shall be permitted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network