USA v. Joe Benally

USA v. Joe Benally

Plaintiff - Appellee,:	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant,:	JOE ARVISO BENALLY
Case Number:	14-10452
Filed:	September 30, 2014
Court:	U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit:	Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed	Description
August 1, 2016	United States v. Benally
August 1, 2016	USA V. JOE BENALLY
November 7, 2016	USA V. JOE BENALLY

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 7, 2016	Filing 9028515887 Filed order and amended opinion (DOROTHY W. NELSON, JOHN T. NOONAN and DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN). The opinion filed on August 1, 2016 is amended as follows: Replace the portion of the opinion that runs from the second paragraph of page 9 of the slip opinion (beginning <Leocal explicitly leaves open the question whether . . . >) through the end of the penultimate paragraph on page 10 (which ends < . . . and is no longer good law.>) with: <After Leocal, we held that neither recklessness nor gross negligence is a sufficient mens rea to establish that a conviction is for a crime of violence under 16. Fernandez- Ruiz, 466 F.3d at 1130. This June, the Supreme Court suggested the opposite, and held that for purposes of a similar statute 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A) reckless conduct indeed can constitute a crime of violence. See Voisine v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2272, 2279 80, 2282 (2016). But we need not resolve any tension regarding the inclusion of reckless conduct in this case. The government concedes that 1112, which requires a mental state of only gross negligence, prohibits conduct that cannot be a crime of violence, even after Voisine. Springfield s opposing rule is clearly irreconcilable with the reasoning and the results of Leocal and Fernandez-Ruiz and is no longer good law.> With this amendment, the panel votes to deny the petition for rehearing. No further petitions for rehearing will be entertained. [10187719]

Date Filed

Document Text

November 7, 2016

Filing 9028515887 Filed order and amended opinion (DOROTHY W. NELSON, JOHN T. NOONAN and DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN). The opinion filed on August 1, 2016 is amended as follows: Replace the portion of the opinion that runs from the second paragraph of page 9 of the slip opinion (beginning <Leocal explicitly leaves open the question whether . . . >) through the end of the penultimate paragraph on page 10 (which ends < . . . and is no longer good law.>) with: <After Leocal, we held that neither recklessness nor gross negligence is a sufficient mens rea to establish that a conviction is for a crime of violence under 16. Fernandez- Ruiz, 466 F.3d at 1130. This June, the Supreme Court suggested the opposite, and held that for purposes of a similar statute 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A) reckless conduct indeed can constitute a crime of violence. See Voisine v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2272, 2279 80, 2282 (2016). But we need not resolve any tension regarding the inclusion of reckless conduct in this case. The government concedes that 1112, which requires a mental state of only gross negligence, prohibits conduct that cannot be a crime of violence, even after Voisine. Springfield s opposing rule is clearly irreconcilable with the reasoning and the results of Leocal and Fernandez-Ruiz and is no longer good law.> With this amendment, the panel votes to deny the petition for rehearing. No further petitions for rehearing will be entertained. [10187719]

Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: USA v. Joe Benally
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff - appellee,: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By:	Christina Wu Covault
Represented By:	Melissa Karlen
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant - appellant,: JOE ARVISO BENALLY
Represented By:	Jeffrey Allen Williams
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?