Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
REPLY TO GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISSTHE FIRST SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
JANET I. LEVINE (STATE BAR NO. 94255)MARTINIQUE E. BUSINO (STATE BAR NO. 270795)CROWELL & MORING LLP515 SOUTH FLOWER STREET, 40TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071-2258PHONE: (213) 622-4750FAX: (213) 622-2690EMAIL: jlevine@crowell.comEMAIL: mbusino@crowell.comAttorneys for DefendantSteve K. LeeJAN L. HANDZLIK (STATE BAR NO. 47959)THOMAS H. GODWIN (STATE BAR NO. 255384)GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP2450 Colorado Avenue, Suite 400 EastSanta Monica, Ca 90404Phone: (310) 586-6542Fax: (310) 586-0542EMAIL: handzlikj@gtlaw.comEMAIL: godwint@gtlaw.comAttorneys for Defendants Lindsey ManufacturingCompany and Keith E. Lindsey
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff,v.ENRIQUE FAUSTINO AGUILAR ORIEGA, ANGELA MARIAGOMEZ AGUILAR, LINDSEYMANUFACTURING COMPANY,KEITH E. LINDSEY, andSTEVE K. LEE,Defendants.))))))))))))))))CASE NO. CR 10-1031(A)-AHM
REPLY TO GOVERNMENT’SOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRSTSUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
Date: March 24, 2011Time: 9:30 a.m.Place: Courtroom 14
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 290 Filed 03/17/11 Page 1 of 27 Page ID #:6420
 
REPLY TO GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISSTHE FIRST SUPERSEDING INDICTMENTi12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage(s)
I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................1II. ARGUMENT ............................................................................................1A. The Defendants’ Motion is Timely.................................................1B. The Government’s Textual and Contextual Arguments Aboutthe Meaning of “Instrumentality” are Unavailing..........................2C. The
Charming Betsy
Canon Is Inapposite......................................7D. No Legislative History Supports the Government’sInterpretation.................................................................................12E. The Government Fails to Rebut Defendants’ VaguenessArguments.....................................................................................14F. Prior Cases the Government Cites are Inapposite Because TheyDid Not Raise Issues the Court Is Now Asked to Address ..........17III. CONCLUSION.......................................................................................20
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 290 Filed 03/17/11 Page 2 of 27 Page ID #:6421
 
REPLY TO GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISSTHE FIRST SUPERSEDING INDICTMENTii12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESPage(s)C
ASES
Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams
,532 U.S. 105 (2001).............................................................................................4
Kolender v. Lawson
,461 U.S. 352 (1983)...........................................................................................16
Munoz v. Ashcroft 
,339 F.3d 950 (9th Cir. 2003)................................................................................9
Murray v. The Schooner Charming Betsy,
6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 64 (1804).......................................................................8, 9, 10
Northcross, et al. v. Bd. of Ed. of Memphis City Schools
¸412 U.S. 427 (1973).........................................................................................6, 7
Serra v. Lappin
,600 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2010)..............................................................................9
Skilling v. United States
,130 S. Ct. 2896 (2010) ...........................................................................16, 17, 20
Smith v. City of Jackson
,544 U.S. 228 (2005).........................................................................................6, 7
United States v. Aguilar 
,883 F.2d 662 (9th Cir. 1989)..............................................................................10
United States v. Carson
,
et al 
.,No. SA CR 09-00077-JVS (C.D. Cal.)...............................................................13
United States v. Covington
,395 U.S. 57 (1969)...............................................................................................2
United States v. Giffen
,326 F. Supp. 2d 497 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)................................................................18
United States v. Kay
,359 F.3d 738 (5th Cir. 2004)..............................................................................10
Case 2:10-cr-01031-AHM Document 290 Filed 03/17/11 Page 3 of 27 Page ID #:6422
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.

    • More From This User

    48 p.
    SEC v. Ashland Oil
    Mike Koehler
    57 Reads
    18 p.
    Ralph Lauren Corp. Non-Prosecution Agreement
    Mike Koehler
    404 Reads
    25 p.
    U.S. v. Pierucci (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    739 Reads
    12 p.
    U.S. v. Rothschild (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    342 Reads
    7 p.
    U.S. v. Rothschild (Plea Agreement)
    Mike Koehler
    360 Reads
    76 p.
    TJGEM Complaint
    Mike Koehler
    186 Reads
    18 p.
    U.S. v. Parker Drilling (DPA)
    Mike Koehler
    192 Reads
    15 p.
    U.S. v. Parker Drilling (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    196 Reads
    19 p.
    U.S. v. Uhl (Plea Agreement)
    Mike Koehler
    250 Reads
    3 p.
    U.S. v. Dubois (DOJ Motion for Downward Departure)
    Mike Koehler
    485 Reads
    21 p.
    DuBois Plea Agreement
    Mike Koehler
    207 Reads
    7 p.
    U.S. v. DuBois (Motion to Seal)
    Mike Koehler
    456 Reads
    12 p.
    U.S. v. Uhl (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    483 Reads
    14 p.
    U.S. v. DuBois (Information)
    Mike Koehler
    223 Reads
    22 p.
    U.S. v. Jensen (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    360 Reads
    21 p.
    U.S. v. Kowalewski (Indictment)
    Mike Koehler
    394 Reads
    1 p.
    The Story of George McLean
    Mike Koehler
    216 Reads
    20 p.
    SEC v. Straub (Defendants' Motion for Interlocutory Appeal)
    Mike Koehler
    328 Reads
    29 p.
    SEC v. Jackson/Ruehlen (Joint Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint)
    Mike Koehler
    329 Reads
    23 p.
    SEC v. Steffan (Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Dismiss)
    Mike Koehler
    512 Reads
    13 p.
    Statement of Facts - Griffiths Energy Enforcement Action (Canada)
    Mike Koehler
    174 Reads
    22 p.
    SEC v. Straub (Decision on Motion to Dismiss)
    Mike Koehler
    1503 Reads
    88 p.
    U.S. v. Duperval (Duperval Appellate Brief)
    Mike Koehler
    442 Reads
    15 p.
    U.S. v. Siriwan (DOJ Response)
    Mike Koehler
    328 Reads
    58 p.
    SEC v. Jackson/Ruehlen Amended Complaint
    Mike Koehler
    438 Reads
    Notes
    Load more