Epstein Secrets

take of age jury instruction because it is consti- tutionally mandated. He relies on United States District Court, 858 F.2d at 537-43, in which the Ninth Circuit engrafted a mistake of agc defense in- to the statute after concluding that such a defense was required under the First Amendment although the stat

ad, Jr., Fed. Public Defend- er, on the brief), for appellant. Philip M. Koppe, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kan- sas City, MO, argued (Bradley J. Schloz- man, U.S. Atty., Katharine Fincham, Asst. U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee. Before COLLOTON, BRIGHT, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. COLLOTON, Circuit Judg

d. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, argued (Ray- mond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defend- er, on the brief), for appellant. Philip M. Koppe, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kan- sas City, MO, argued (Bradley J. Schloz- man, U.S. Atty., Katharine Fincham, Asst. U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee. Before COLLOTON,

is ca- pacity as District Attorney for San Francisco County, et aL, Defendants- Appellees. Nos. 82-4427, 83-2581. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 12, 1984. Decided Sept. 3, 1986. Citizen and organizations promoting voting rights of Americans with ethnic backgrou

o, Miami, Fla, for plaintiffs-appel- lants. Richard Essen, Essen & Essen, P.A., North Miami Beach, Fla., for William Fa- loon. Dexter W. Lebtinen, U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., Barbara K. Bisno, Ant. U.S. Atty., Deborah S. Smolover, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Jacqueline H. Eagle, Office of Consumer Litigation,

Robert W. Ware, United States Marshal for the Southern District of California, Appel. ken. Mime. Nos. 895, 596. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Nov. 5, 1958. Accused, who had been indicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan for alleged- t mailing cir

e damage, and the statute is either unconstitutional or the attorney is transcending his authority under a valid statute. *525 Francis G. Caffey, U.S. Atty., of New York City (William C. Fins. Vincent H. Rothwell, and Cornelius J. Smyth, all of New York City, of counsel), for appellants. Root, Clark,

y Op. Serv. 11,330, 2007 Daily Journal D.A.R. 14,672 (Cite as: 504 F.3d 737) H U.S. Sinerius C.A.9 (Mont.),2007. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arthur Emil SINERIUS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant. No. 06-30327. Argued and Submitted March 9, 20

a sex offense conviction. U.S.S.G. § 4B1.5(a), 18 U.S.C.A. *859 Philip M. Koppe, Asst. U.S. Any., argued, Kansas City, MO (Bradley J. Schlozman, U.S. Atty., Cynthia L. Phillips, Asst. U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellant. Stephen C. Moss, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, argued, Kansas City, MO (Raymo