Argued and Submitted March 11, 2013 Withdrawn From Submission Resubmitted November 1, 2013 San Francisco, California
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona D.C. No. 2:09-cr-01406-SRB-3, 2:09-cr-01406-SRB-3 Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Jon M. Sands, Federal Public Defender, District of Arizona; Daniel L. Kaplan (argued), Assistant Federal Public Defender, Phoenix, Arizona, for Defendant-Appellant.
John S. Leonardo, United States Attorney, District of Arizona; Mark S. Kokanovich, Deputy Appellate Chief; Dominic Lanza (argued), Assistant United States Attorney, Phoenix, Arizona, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Before: J. Clifford Wallace, M. Margaret McKeown, and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges.
Affirming a conviction, the panel rejected the defendant's contention that the government engaged in outrageous conduct during the investigation that led to the defendant's arrest.
The panel explained that neither the fact that a government informant had previously committed crimes, nor that the informant was trying to reduce his future criminal liability, satisfies the defendant's burden of showing that the government's use of the informant was so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice.
WALLACE, Circuit Judge
Brandon Hullaby appeals from his judgment of conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(ii) and possession of a firearm in furtherance of the conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). Hullaby objects to various trial rulings by the district court. Here, we consider only his contention that the government engaged in outrageous conduct during the investigation that led to Hullaby's arrest. In a separately filed unpublished disposition, we consider his remaining arguments.
Hullaby filed a timely notice of appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Hullaby's outrageous conduct claim hinges on the character of a government ...