U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997

United States v. Paul Eugene Jamar

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 28, 1997

122 F.3d 1075; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 29401; 1997 WL 542237 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Opinion

122 F.3d 1075

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Paul Eugene JAMAR, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 96-50513.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 25, 1997.**
Decided Aug. 28, 1997.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California William Matthew Byrne, Jr., Chief Judge, Presiding

Before: SCHROEDER, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM*

Paul Eugene Jamar's contention that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss for selective prosecution is rejected in light of our recent opinion in United States v. Turner, 104 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 1566 (1997). Accordingly, his conviction and sentence are

AFFIRMED.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.