USA V. TARL BRANDON, No. 13-10281 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on December 11, 2014.
Download PDF
FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MAR 10 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 13-10281 D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00494-KJDVCF-1 District of Nevada, Las Vegas TARL BRANDON, Defendant - Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ORDER No. 13-10282 D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00209-KJDVCF-1 District of Nevada, Las Vegas TARL BRANDON, Defendant - Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TARL BRANDON, Defendant - Appellant. No. 13-10283 D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00407-KJDGWF-1 District of Nevada, Las Vegas Before: NOONAN, FERNANDEZ, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. The memorandum disposition filed on December 11, 2014 is amended as follows: At page 2, line 23, the following citation is added: “Eslaminia v. White, 136 F.3d 1234, 1237 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1998)” With this amendment, the panel votes to deny the petition for rehearing. Judge Ikuta votes to deny petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Noonan and Judge Fernandez recommend denying the petition for rehearing en banc. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing and for rehearing en banc will be entertained. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
