United States v. Christopher Ray Plouffe

437 F.3d 917, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 3368, 2006 WL 319040
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Christopher Ray Plouffe. Read the opinion of the Court — 445 F.3d 1126
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 13, 2006·No. 05-30045·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The parties are directed to file supplemental letter briefs addressing whether the court has jurisdiction to review the reasonableness of Appellant’s sentence, which is within the Guidelines range, in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); our pre-Booker precedent such as United States v. Reed, 914 F.2d 1288 (9th Cir.1990), and United States v. Pelayo-Bautista, 907 F.2d 99 (9th Cir.1990); and the holding of Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 893, 900 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc).

The parties are directed to file simultaneous letter briefs on or before fifteen (15) days from the filed date of this order. The briefs shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages (double-spaced)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Christopher Ray Plouffe, 437 F.3d 917, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 3368, 2006 WL 319040 (9th Cir. 2006).

437 F.3d 917 (United States v. Christopher Ray Plouffe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Victor Charles Reed
914 F.2d 1288 (Ninth Circuit, 1990)
Miller v. Gammie
335 F.3d 889 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)