U.S. v. Crawford
Decision Date | 24 August 2005 |
Docket Number | No. 03-30263.,03-30263. |
Citation | 422 F.3d 1145 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio Feliciano CRAWFORD, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
George JC Jacobs, III, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Richard D. Wall, Esq., Attorney at Law, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before BRUNETTI, McKEOWN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
This case involves "extraordinary circumstances" sufficient to justify our recall of the mandate, Calderon v. Thompson, 523 U.S. 538, 550, 118 S.Ct. 1489, 140 L.Ed.2d 728 (1998); see also Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460-61 (9th Cir.1996), because: (1) the sentencing judge expressed explicit reservations on the record about the sentence required under the previously mandatory Sentencing Guidelines;1 and (2) the Supreme Court's decision in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), foreshadowing its holding in United States v. Booker, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), was rendered before the mandate issued.2 Accordingly, we recall the mandate, vacate the sentence, and remand to the district court for resentencing pursuant to Booker, United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1078-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc) ( ), and United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906 (9th Cir.2005) ( ).
MANDATE RECALLED, SENTENCE VACATED and REMANDED.
1. The sentencing judge is on the record saying:
2. Our decision in United States v. King, 419 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir.2005) (per curiam), where we addressed Booker in denying the defendant's motion to recall the mandate, is distinguishable because neither of the special circumstances that we highlight...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Carrington v. U.S.
.... On November 3, 2005, Judge Bryan denied relief on the grounds raised by the parties. He noted, however, that in United States v. Crawford, 422 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir.2005), the Ninth Circuit had recalled its mandate in a sentencing case that involved "extraordinary circumstances." Judge Bryan......
-
Carrington v. U.S., 05-36143.
...asked this court to recall our mandate based on the existence of extraordinary circumstances, as we had done in United States v. Crawford, 422 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir.2005), and to give him an opportunity to re-sentence these two defendants. See Tillitz v. United States, No. C05-5144RJB, 2005 WL......
-
U.S. v. Labrada-Bustamante
...where we can reliably determine from the record that the sentence imposed would have differed materially. See United States v. Crawford, 422 F.3d 1145, 1146 (9th Cir.2005). As Labrada's case is one of those rare cases where the district court stated on the record that he felt compelled to i......
-
U.S. v. Crawford
...in light of Booker and pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Crawford, 422 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir.2005) (order). New counsel was appointed for Crawford and the parties re-briefed the sentencing issues. The district court held another ......
-
REEXAMINING RECALL OF MANDATE: LIMITATIONS ON THE INHERENT POWER TO CHANGE FINAL JUDGMENTS.
...(laying out recall motions as one alternative to a successive habeas petition under the AEDPA). (7.) Compare United States v. Crawford, 422 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2005) (trial judge's statements disapproving of guidelines constitute "extraordinary circumstances"), with Carrington v. United Sta......