U.S. v. Ameline, 02-30326.
| Decision Date | 11 March 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 02-30326.,02-30326. |
| Citation | 401 F.3d 1007 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Alfred Arnold AMELINE, Defendant—Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Lori Harper Suek, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, Michael Rotker, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Steven F. Hubachek, Esq., Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
David M. Porter, Esq., Federal Public Defender's Office, Sacramento, CA, Anthony R. Gallagher, Esq., Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Amicus.
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Allen
..."not all cases would warrant a new sentencing hearing because any error might be harmless"), vacated and reh'g en banc granted, 401 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Coumaris, 399 F.3d 343, 351 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (stating that Booker challenge was "governed by the harmless error sta......
-
U.S. v. Gonzalez-Huerta
...rights were affected, we find United States v. Ameline, 400 F.3d 646, 654 (9th Cir.2005), vacated and reh'g en banc granted 401 F.3d 1007 (2005), unpersuasive. 4. Because plain error must be assessed based upon the record on appeal, we find the approach to Booker plain error adopted in Unit......
-
U.S. v. Ameline
...sentence and remanded for resentencing. Id. at 657-58. We vacated the panel opinion and granted rehearing en banc. United States v. Ameline, 401 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir.2005). Although Ameline did not challenge the constitutionality of the Guidelines in the district court or in his opening brief......
-
U.S. v. Pirani
...Oliver, 397 F.3d 369, 379-80 (6th Cir.2005); United States v. Ameline, 400 F.3d 646, 654 (9th Cir.2005), reh'g en banc granted, 401 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2005). Like most other circuits, we disagree with the Fourth Circuit's definition of the plain error at issue. The error in Booker was not ......