United States of America v. Luis Michael Molina

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LUIS MICHAEL MOLINA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50276
D.C. No. 3:12-cr-04922-BEN-1
ORDER AMENDING
Before: M. SMITH, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
The memorandum disposition filed January 8, 2016 in the above-captioned
case is hereby amended as follows:
The sentence that currently reads, <Villasensor’s testimony that she was
going to pay a fee to be smuggled into the United States was admissible under Rule
602 because her earlier testimony that she had worked with another individual on
the details of being smuggled into the United States established sufficient personal
knowledge.> is replaced by the following sentence, <Villasensor's testimony that
she was going to pay a fee to be smuggled into the United States was admissible
under Rule 602 because her testimony established sufficient personal knowledge of
FILED
MAR 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
plans to pay a fee.>
With this amendment, the panel has unanimously voted to deny Appellant’s
petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc. The full court has been
advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge has requested a vote on
whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petitions for
rehearing and rehearing en banc are DENIED. Further petitions for rehearing and
rehearing en banc shall not be entertained.

-- 2 of 2 --