U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2012

United States v. Brian Jackson

United States v. Brian Jackson
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided February 24, 2012

United States v. Brian Jackson

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 24 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-10014 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00438-JCM-RJJ v. MEMORANDUM * BRIAN K. JACKSON, Defendant - Appellee.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-10015 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00299-JCM-LRL v. SHANNON PARSONS, Defendant - Appellee.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-10016 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00332-JCM- GWF v. WAYNE LAMARR GANAWAY, Defendant - Appellee.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 11-10088 11-10149 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00316-JCM- GWF v. SHARON HAMPTON, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding

11-10014 11-10015 11-10016 2 11-10088 & 11-10149 Submitted February 21, 2012 ** Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

In these consolidated appeals, the United States appeals the district court’s orders denying the Government’s request for criminal forfeiture money judgments against Shannon Parsons, Wayne Lamarr Ganaway, and Sharon Hampton, and reducing the criminal forfeiture money judgment against Brian K. Jackson. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

In light of our holding in United States v. Newman, 659 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 2011), we vacate the district court’s orders denying the imposition of criminal forfeiture money judgments against Parsons, Ganaway, and Hampton , and the district court’s order reducing Jackson’s criminal forfeiture money judgment, and we remand.

The Government’s motion to vacate and remand for further proceedings is denied as moot.

VACATED and REMANDED.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

11-10014 11-10015 11-10016 3 11-10088 & 11-10149

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