⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit considers Jerod Alexander's drug and firearm appeal. An undercover drug purchase led to an Alaska prosecution. Agents later seized drugs and firearms from an apartment, and a jury convicted Alexander in 2023. The appeal turns partly on who decided a pretrial request to replace his lawyer. Judge Kindred denied that request while under investigation for misconduct involving federal prosecutors. Judge Sharon Gleason, not Kindred, presided at the trial. Alexander's lawyer will argue that the investigation created an appearance of bias. Recusal means a judge steps aside when impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The government will argue that Kindred's limited involvement does not require a new trial. The appeal also challenges a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum on the drug conviction. One contested prior conviction is a robbery. For that robbery to count, one statutory requirement is more than twelve months of imprisonment actually served. The parties disagree about whether custody for violating probation counts as part of the original sentence, and whether the jury had sufficient evidence of the time served. The government will defend the jury's finding; Alexander will argue that the custody records leave a reasonable doubt.

United States v. Alexander (No. 24-5100) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 21, 2026.