The Tenth Circuit recently reaffirmed the scope of the mandate rule in United States v. Dutch, 978 F.3d 1341 (10th Cir. 2020) (Dutch II). The circuit court ruled that in a prior appeal, it had 
issued specific directions—not a general remand—and the district court erred by failing to follow those directions. The circuit court explained that, while it was not infallible, the district court was obligated to follow its instructions, even if the court believed the circuit court had erred or had insufficiently explained its rationale. The court noted that a district court may deviate from the mandate only in a few exceptional circumstances that did not exist here.
Procedural History: ‘Dutch I’
In January 2016, Albuquerque police officers responded to a scene where a vehicle crashed into a wall. They took the defendant (Dutch) into custody and discovered he had a loaded pistol and methamphetamine. Id. at 1343. Dutch pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. §§922(g) and 924(e). Id.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
