Joe Ramirez v. James Kiraly

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a non-Article III federal judge from the Mariana Islands could not sit by designation in Ninth Circuit panel
• holding that Federal statute does not allow an Article IV territorial judge to sit on the Ninth Circuit appeal panel for Gaum
• holding that statutory provisions did not allow an Article IV territorial-court judge to sit on the Ninth Circuit panel that heard the petitioners’ appeal. The panel’s decision was vacated and remanded
• stating that a senior circuit judge is “of course, [a] life-tenured Article III judge[ ]”
• concluding that the phrase “district court” in a statute did not include “Article IV territorial courts, even when their jurisdiction is similar to that of a United States District Court created under Article III” (quoting Mookini v. United States, 303 U.S. 201, 205 (1938))
• refusing to consider constitutional challenge and holding that violation of statute alone constituted plain error, requiring invalidation of conviction without showing of prejudice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).