USA v. Vincent Jones

Filing

ORDER: The opinion issued on June 28, 2017, in connection with the above-referenced case, is AMENDED as follows: Page 6, first paragraph under the heading Discussion, line 5: the word in should be inserted after the word wrong. Page 10, footnote 1, is completely replaced with the following language: For purposes of argument, we will assume that the gun safes were closed, and thus the officers could not have observed the guns in plain view. [6851650-1] [6851650] [16-4254]

Case: 16-4254

Document: 34

Filed: 06/30/2017

Pages: 1

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
June 30, 2017
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge
MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

No. 16-4254
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

Appeal from the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
Indiana, South Bend Division.

v.
No. 3:15-cr-00048-JD-MGG-1
VINCENT JONES,
Defendant-Appellant.

Jon E. DeGuilio,
Judge.

ORDER
The opinion issued on June 28, 2017, in connection with the above-referenced case, is
AMENDED as follows:
Page 6, first paragraph under the heading Discussion, line 5: the word “in” should be
inserted after the word “wrong.”
Page 10, footnote 1, is completely replaced with the following language: “For purposes of
argument, we will assume that the gun safes were closed, and thus the officers could not
have observed the guns in plain view.”