Cases / LEGAL RESEARCH
What is the actual appellate document behind this record?
What the record establishes
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit — Order and Amended Opinion, United States v. Holmes and Balwani (Captured Public Document). This is an independently captured public document of exactly 360,184 bytes, held under a content-addressed hash. Possession of the bytes is not the same as an independent authenticity or signature check.
What this is built on
Independently captured public appellate opinion
Captured via counterpedia-acquisition HttpFetcher (arcs-amnesiac PR #124). ARCS Verify full_artifact_chain.v0_1 passed; authenticity_verified and signature_verified are not_evaluated per arcs-verify design. Bytes: 360184.
Inspect the recorded basis →
Inspect the public source material
These routes come from existing public source and record bindings. A source being present or associated does not establish that it supports a particular claim, independently verifies its contents, or changes its standing.
Ninth Circuit Order and Amended Opinion (captured public document)
What this does not establish
Counterpedia holds the captured bytes and their hash. It has not independently evaluated authenticity or a cryptographic signature — those checks are recorded as not evaluated, not as passed. Possession is not interpretation.
How do you know?
Every basis item above is read from a specific governed artifact:
- counterpedia@0f571bf59f6da6e698f1b93061f19902f7fab2cf:public/garpedia/admitted/records/TH-S09.json
Proof status: VERIFIED